SUDHA SINGH Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the opposite parties.

(2.) The petitioners are holders of Regular Stage Carriage Permits for the route known as Muzaffar Nagar-Budhana-Kandala-Issopurteet and allied route. They are plying their vehicles on the basis of the permits. Under the direction of the State Transport Tribunal dated 8.12.1992 their applications for renewal of permits were kept pending for a long period. On 28.8.2002 the said applications were considered by the Regional Transport Authority, Saharanpur. The petitioners along with sixtynine permit holders moved the representations before the concerned authority for getting the renewal applications decided. On 19.4.2003 the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Muzaffar Nagar directed the petitioners to stop plying on the ground that the Regional Transport Authority had refused to renew their permits. The petitioners came to know about the rejection of the renewal applications on 19.4.2003. The order was passed on 28.2.2002. The petitioners preferred the appeals against the said order before the opposite party No. 1 which were registered as Appeal Nos. 182 of 2003, 181 of 2003, 180 of 2003, 177 of 2003 and 179 of 2003. These appeals were filed without depositing the appeal fees as provided under Rule 125 of the U. P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1998. On 21.5.2003 the appellants were directed to deposit the appeal fees by 2.6.2003. No fee was deposited on 2.6.2003. The appellants moved an application on 4.6.2003 praying for three weeks' time to deposit the appeal fees. On 20.6.2003 this application was taken up and an order was passed granting the time of seven days i.e., up to 27.6.2003. These applications were moved without disclosing any ground for not depositing the fees' along with an appeal. On 27.6.2003 another application was moved for getting time to deposit the fees. Again on 27.6.2003 seven days time was allowed as last opportunity to deposit fees but no fees were deposited. Again on 3.7.2003 an application was moved and again the Tribunal allowed one week's time to deposit appeal fees and even then the appeal fees was not deposited upto 7.7.2003. On 7.7.2003 the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, for non-prosecution.

(3.) Shri Ashish Saxena, learned counsel for the appellants moved an application for recall of the order dated 7.7.2003 on 23.7.2003. This application is Annexure-9. In this application it was stated that three days after the filing of the appeal on 21.5.2003, there was a marriage of the brother of the advocate, so the learned counsel for the appellants could not inform regarding the deposit of appeal fees to the appellants. It was also alleged that Shri Ashish Saxena, Advocate sent a letter to the appellants on 21.6.2003 but this letter was not received by the appellant. It was also alleged :