P SAMIAPPA GOUNDER Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :- Notification under Section 57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 had been issued inviting applications for the grant of additional stage carriage permit on the route Kangayam to Kodumudi. Applications were filed, by several persons including the present petitioner and Thirumalai Transport Service, (hereinafter referred to as the intervener for convenience). The present petitioner had filed W.P.No.2920 of 1984 seeking for a writ of mandamus, which was disposed of with a direction to the Regional Transport Authority to consider and dispose of the applications in accordance with law. Pursuant to the order passed in W.P.No.5289 of 1984, filed by one of the existing operators, an order was passed indicating that the applications, may be considered but decision should not be implemented till final decision. It is stated that the Regional Transport Authority had taken a decision on 9.5.1984 to grant permit to the present intervenor. Ultimately, W.P.No.5289 of 1984 was dismissed with a direction to the Regional Transport Authority to give effect to its decision. However such decision could not be given effect to due to change of personnel in the meantime and the successor Regional Transport Authority fixed date on 22.12.86 for personal hearing. The present petitioner filed W.P.No.13719 of 1986 seeking for writ of mandamus, which was allowed on 30.11.1993 and a direction was issued to the Regional Transport Authority to issue permit within the stipulated period. Since such direction was not complied with, Contempt Appln.No.75 of 1994 was filed and pursuant to the order passed in the said contempt application, temporary permit was issued on 6.5.1994 and after convening a timing conference, pucca permit was issued on 7.6.1994.

(2.) The present petitioner filed W.A.No.1048 of 1995 and Cheran Transport Corporation Limited filed W.A.No.1049 of 1995 against the order of the learned single Judge in W.P.No.13710 of 1986. The present petitioner had also filed W.P.No.13688 of 1994 seeking for a direction to the Regional Transport Authority to issue certified copy of the proceedings relating to grant of permit to the present intervener. Ultimately on 28.6.1996, both the writ appeals were allowed and the proceedings of the Regional Transport Authority were held to be nullity. While considering, it has been observed in the writ appeal :

(3.) As a result of the aforesaid decision, stage carriage permit which had been issued to the present intervener stood withdrawn. The connected writ petition filed by the present petitioner seeking grant of certified copy was dismissed with the following observation :