KSETHURAMACHAR AND Vs. N SHIRANNAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Petitions are directed against the order of the State Transport Authority which was made in the following circumstances:

(2.) Applications were invited for a permit for stage carriage in the route between Mylara & Kottur, both in the District of Bellary. The Petitioners and six other application including respondent No. 4, applied for such permit. On 22-11-55, the said permit to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner on 26-12-55 produced his vehicle and other necessary certificates. On 4-1-1956 the permit was granted. Against the said Authority, Bangalore On 29-6-56 the appeal of respondent No. 4 in W. P. No. 5 of 1958 was allowed and a permit was ordered to be granted to the said respondent. Against that decision two appeals were filed to the Government, one by the petitioner in W. P. No. 5/58 and another by respondent No. 4 in W. P. No. 28/58. These appeals stood transferred to the Mysore Board of Revenue and the Mysore Board of Revenue on 2nd May, 1957, allowed both the appeals and remanded the matter to the State Transport Authority to decide according to law. After the matter came back to the State Transport Authority on such remand the State Transport Authority took the view that all application were not in the prescribed form and did not contain the particulars required to be given by S. 46 of the Motor Vehicles Act and directed the Regional Transport Authority to call for fresh applications. It is against that order that these petitions, being W. P. No. 5/58 and W. P. No. 28/58, have been filed. I should have mentioned that at the time when the apps for permit were made in this case S. 46 had not been amended. The said Section was amended but before the State Transport Authority gave its decision. This case, therefore, in my opinion, is governed by S. 46 as it stood before its amendment. What has to be determined is whether or not the provisions of that Section had been complied with. it is necessary therefore, for the purpose of the present app to set out Section 46, as it stood before the amendment and also as it now stands after the amendment. S. 46, as it stood before the amendment, reads as follows:

(3.) I should at this stage, mention that the particulars. which were not given in the apps for permit filed before the Regional Transport Authority and for which the State Transport Authority quashed the Order of the Regional Transport Authority and directed the Regional Transport Authority to call for fresh application, were the particulars mentioned in Columns 5, 6, and 7 of the application form which had to be filled up and were as follows: