KANCHAN SINGH Vs. S T A T LUCKNOW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India arising out of proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The two petitioners who have filed the present petition are Kanchan Singh and Inder Pal Singh. Both the petitioners held a joint stage carriage permit No. 1331 on Khurja-Meerut route. This permit was valid till 18th August, 1973. On 12th April, 1973, the petitioners sent an application for renewal of the permit under certificate of posting to the Regional Transport Officer, Meerut in his capacity as the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority. Meerut. This application was, in fact, not received by the Regional Transport Officer, Meerut, who in fact is the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority. Meerut. On October. 22,1973, the petitioners filed duplicate copies of the application dated 12th April, 1973. along with a certificate of posting dated 12th April, 1973 bearing the seal of the Post Office. This application was thereafter published under the Act.

(2.) On 20th September, 1973 Gopi Singh, respondent No. 3 filed his objection against the renewal of the permit in favour of the petitioners. On the same day he also made an application for grant of a fresh permit in his favour in the vacancy which was to be caused by expiry of the permit in favour of the petitioners. Gopi Singh did not submit his application six weeks before the expiry of the permit. His application was not published in the U.P. Gazette and security money was not deposited.

(3.) The application for renewal of the permit made by the petitioner along with the objection filed by Gopi Singh came up for consideration in the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut which was held on May, 15 and 16, 1974. The Regional Transport Authority, Meerut though held that the application for renewal dated 12th April, 1973 was not received by the Regional Transport Authority, however, in view of the circumstances of the case, treated the application for renewal made by the petitioners as having been filed within time. Since the delay in filing the application was condoned by the Regional Transport Authority, the Regional Transport Authority thereafter considered the renewal application and granted the renewal in favour of the petitioner. It was noted in the resolution of that day that the application of Gopi Singh was not submitted within six weeks from the date of expiry of the permit. It was not published in the U. P. Gazette and no security money was deposited.