RAM PAL SINGH Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The dispute relates to the route known as Sector-8 NOIDA, 8-10, 8-9, 5-6, 1-2, 2-15, 3-16, 3-19, 4-19, 9-20, 20-21, 25-26, 26-31, 26-30, 27-28 National Botanical Garden, Sector 38-44, 40-43, 41-42 NEPZ-Kulesra-Surajpur-Dadri and back Surajpur-Kasna-Bilaspur. Fourteen persons including the petitioner have been granted permits by respondent No. 2 to ply their City Buses on the route. It appears that certain complaints were made that the permit holders were not serving a part of the route, i.e., in between Surajpur-Dadri and back and Surajpur-Kasna-Bilaspur. The matter came up for consideration in the meeting of the R.T.A. held on 12.5.2000 and 31.5.2000 an order (Annexure-6) was passed by the R.T.A. curtailing 9 kms. route from Surajpur to Dadri by invoking the provisions of Section 72 (2) (xxii) of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to 'the Act'). The effect of this order has been that all the 14 permit holders who were operating their buses are not now entitled to ply their buses on a portion of route in between Surajpur and Dadri though they are entitled to operate their buses on the remaining portion of the City Bus route. This order of the R.T.A. was challenged by the present petitioner as well as one another operator Rajesh by filing two separate Appeal Nos. 52 and 57 of 2000 under Section 89 (1) (b) of the Act. Respondent No. 3 Sadhu Ram intervened and the Tribunal refusing to implead him as party to the appeals conceded in his favour a right of hearing. After hearing the parties concerned, the Tribunal respondent No. 1 dismissed both the appeals by impugned order dated 11.9.2000 (Annexure-10).

(2.) By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 31.5.2000, Annexure-6 to the petition, passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Ghaziabad thereinafter referred to 'the R.T.A.') respondent No. 2 and the order dated 11.9.2000, Annexure-10 to the writ petition, passed by the State Transport Authority Tribunal, U. P., Lucknow-respondent No. 1 in Appeal No. 52 of 2000 whereby the portion of permitted route for City Bus Service has been curtailed. It is prayed that the aforesaid orders be quashed and a direction be issued to the respondents not to give effect to the order aforesaid.

(3.) One Sadhu Ram, who filed a caveat was directed to be impleaded as respondent No. 3. He has filed a counter-affidavit to which rejoinder affidavit has been filed. In view of the agreement between the parties, this writ petition was taken up for final disposal on merits at the admission stage on the basis of the material available.