B.O.DAVIS Vs. B.T.MARTIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants filed this appeal on the basis of leave granted by the Court. As stage carriage operators, they are operating on the route. Permits were granted in the name of the writ petitioners. On joint applications under Section 82 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988(hereinafter referred to as the Act for short), the permits were transferred by the writ petitioners to the appellants during the pendency of the writ petition. The writ petitioners in W.P.(C) No.5819/2008, from which the appeal arises, filed the writ petition challenging Ext.P9 which is a common judgment of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowing the revision petitions filed by the KSRTC and cancelling the permits issued to the writ petitioners. The Tribunal found that the permits granted to the writ petitioners violated the Aluva - Vadakkumpuram, a complete exclusion scheme, as the proposed route overlaps the route under the complete exclusion scheme. The learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition and took the following view;

(2.) We heard the learned counsel for the appellants Sri.P. Deepak, the learned counsel Sri.P.C.Chacko on behalf of the KSRTC and Sri.C.R.Syamkumar learned Government Pleader.

(3.) Sri.Deepak would make essentially two submissions. It is firstly contended that the Aluva - Vadakkumpuram scheme is not a complete exclusion scheme. The next contention is that if it is found that it is a complete exclusion scheme, the said scheme is no longer good law by virtue of the principle of desuetude.