R. VASANTHA Vs. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition as also the civil revision petitions involve identical, issue for consideration and learned counsel appearing on either side also made submissions in common. Hence, they are dealt with together. For a proper appreciation of the issues raised, the salient facts leading to the filing of the writ petition as well as the revisions may be referred to hereinafter.

(2.) W. P. No. 1591 of 1985 has been filed for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for and quash the proceedings of the respondent dated 30-1-1985 in R. No. P4/96233/84 and consequently direct the respondent to take up the renewal application of the petitioner for renewing the permit of her contract carriage omni bus TDL. 2757 for a period of five years from 3-10-1983 and dispose of the same on merits.

(3.) The Petitioner was holding a contract carriage (omni bus) permit issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Salem and renewed further by the State Transport Authority, Madras up to 3-10-1983 to ply on all roads in Tamil Nadu in respect of an omni Bus TDL. 2757. The Petitioner applied for renewal for a further period of five years from 3-10-1983 to the State Transport Authority. Relying upon the clarification said to have been issued by the State Government in letter No. 59233ltr. VI 83 Home dated 7-4-1984, the State Transport Authority felt that it cannot interfere with the functions of the Regional Transport Authority and consequently, transferred the application to the file of the Regional Transport Authority, Salem for disposal. Aggrieved against the grant of temporary permit restricted to the region of Salem District as also the transfer of the application to the Regional Transport Authority, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 8967 of 1984 for a writ of mandamus to the respondent to dispose of the application for renewal by getting back the same from the Regional Transport Authority, Salem. This court (S. Mohan, J. as the learned Judge then was) by an order dated 21-11-1984 proceeded, on the footing that as the law stood, the Regional Transport Authority had no jurisdiction to grant State wide permit and since the petitioner had already a pucca permit for contract carriage to ply throughout the State of Tamil Nadu, renewal of such a permit could be granted only by the State Transport Authority and consequently directed the respondent to dispose of the application with a further direction to the Regional Transport Authority to return the application forthwith. Thereupon the respondent took up the application for consideration and again passed the impugned order dated-30-1-1985 holding that the Regional Transport Authority: is the competent authority to entertain the application for renewal of omni bus permit and ordered return of the application for renewal with a direction to the permit-holder to approach the Regional Transport Authority Salem for renewal of the primary permit for Salem District and then approach the respondent for renewal of extension or Statewide validity. Aggrieved, the above writ petition has been filed.