GANGADHARA MENON Vs. P S N MOTORS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions under Art.226 of the Constitution arise out of the grant of a Stage Carriage permit for the route Chalakudy-Malayattur via Kalady by the 2nd respondent State Transport Appellate Tribunal in favour of the 1st Respondent P.S.N. Motors (Private) Ltd. The petitioner in O.P. 803/58 in one of the rival applicants, viz. Gangadhara Menon and the petitioner in O. P. 47 of 1959 is another rival applicant Messrs. Anamallais Bus Transports (Private) Ltd.

(2.) The notification calling for applications for the route was dated 9-11-1955 and there were 10 applicants inclusive of the petitioners and the 1st respondent in O. P. 803 who is the 1st respondent in O. P. 47. On 5-5-1956 the R. T. B. preferred Gangadhara Menon as against all others. Vide Ext. R1 order. The order was set aside by the Appellate Authority by Ext. R2 order dated 14-8-1956 on the ground that no reason was disclosed in Ext. R1. The RTA passed fresh order Ext. R3 on 31-1-57 again in favour of Gangadhara Menon. This order also was set aside by the Appellate Authority by Ext. R4 O.23-7-57. Still again the RTA chose Gangadhara Menon vide Ext. R5-P1 order dated 24-8-1957. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal on this revision not only set aside Ext. R5 but granted permit in favour of P. S. N. Motors by its order Ex. P2 dated 22-11-1958. This had led to the O. Ps. herein.

(3.) Now Gangadhara Menon is only a small operator as contrasted with his rivals herein Messrs. P. S. N. Motors and the Anamallais. But he has been successively operating the Chowara-Malayattur route via Kalady. He had also without complaint been operating a temporary permit on the route under consideration Chalakudy-Malayattur granted to him in 1957 until the Pukka Permit was issued to him under Ex. R5 order on 24-8-1957. And since Ex. 5 date he has been on the lines without causing difficulty to the travelling public. It would appear further that he had established garage at Chalakudy and Kalady though after Ex. R1 date. He has also his residence on the route. It is these various qualifications that recommended Gangadhara Menon to the R.T.A. The Appellate Authority thought that the principle of supporting a small operation as against big ones, if other conditions were equal referred to and applied by the R. T. A. when it passed the final order R5 was unobjectionable. But it thought that the other condition-viz. as to operational efficiency should not have been later acquired by the small operator as here. According to the Appellate Authority, the position as on 5-5-1956 when the first order was passed by the R. T. A. should alone apply. But why it belated that date and not more consistently the notification date or at least the date when the rival application for permit was respectively made is not clear. It is no doubt true that the applications refer to qualifications and necessarily refer to subsisting ones and not to be acquired in the future. But even so there is no principle that subsequent development should not be taken into consideration. For instance there could have been a decrease in operational efficiency in particular case during the interval between the making of the application and its disposal. It will be ill serving the travelling public to ignore that situation. Indeed the touchstone in this matter should be the needs of the travelling public and whatever conduces to the promotion thereof may be taken note of Reference in this connection be made to a case in AIR (1955) N. U. C. No. 3589 of the Allahabad High Court. In my judgment the R. T. A. had applied the legitimate tests and adjudged the matter in favour of Gangadhara Menon. In such circumstances the cancellation of that order and the interpretation of an order in favour of the P. S. N. Motors was altogether unnecessary and uncalled for.