M V JOSEPH Vs. SENAPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By Ex. R2 dated 6-2-1969, the 2nd respondent Regional Transport Authority (the RTA. for short) directed the issue of a temporary permit for a period of four months to the appellant, who was not an operator on the particular route, under S.62 of the Motor Vehicles Act overruling the objections of five operators on the route. A permit was issued on 11-2-1969, and the appellant commenced operation the very next day.

(2.) A person who has opposed the grant of a permit has a right of appeal under clause (f) of S.64 of the Act, and, ordinarily, that would be an impediment to his coming direct to this Court with an application under Art.226 of the Constitution. The Ist respondent, an operator on the route, was under no such disability, for, he had not appeared before the R.T.A. or otherwise opposed the grant to the appellant, although his father was one of the five operators who had. He came to this Court with an application under Art.226 of the Constitution for quashing the grant. That has been allowed by the learned single judge who heard the case. Hence this appeal.

(3.) The grounds urged by the 1st respondent for quashing the grant (omitting those which have not been urged before us) were: