KUNJILAL HANUMANLALA JAISWAL Vs. B.C. DEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 before the State Transport Authority, Bombay, and also the appellate proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal. Since both the applications arise out of the same original proceedings, we have heard them together and this common judgment will dispose of both these petitions.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this dispute may now be noted. The inter -State route Nagpur -Indore via Amravati and Dharni is the subject -matter of grant of regular permit for which there were four competitors. It is not in dispute that there has been inter -State agreement between the State Governments of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. According to the terms of that agreement on the Nagpur -Indore inter -State route the primary permit is to be issued by the State Transport Authorities of Maharashtra and it is to be counter -signed by their counterpart in Madhya Pradesh.

(3.) ONE of the technical objections raised against the M.S.R.T.C. by the other claimants was that before applying for such a permit, the Corporation had to comply with the provisions of Section 20 of the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950. This objection was disposed of in the course of two previous hearings ending on December 15, 1975. The objection was over -ruled by an order which said that non -compliance of the provisions of Section 20 of the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950 does not debar the Corporation from applying altogether. However, the Corporation having subsequently complied with the provisions of Section 20 of the said Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950, before the application became ripe for hearing there was no technical infirmity which stood in their way. The S.T.A. therefore decided to consider the application of the M.S.R.T.C. on merits along with others.