(1.) The writ petition as well as the writ appeal can be disposed of under a common order not only because the petitioner and the appellant in both cases is the same, but also for the reason that there are substantially the same contentions.
(2.) We Will now briefly refer to the salient features of the two cases. The petitioner in W.P.No. 3187 of 1975 was having a permit to ply a stage carriage on the route Chittoor to Tirupathi via Penumur, which is 46 miles in distance. She was given permit only for plying one stage carriage and that was to expire on 4th December, 1975. In Writ Appeal No. 425 of 1974, the same person was having permits for plying four stage carriages on the route Chittoor to Tirupathi via Puthalpat. The distance of this route is 42 miles. These permits also were to expire on 4th December, 1975. A draft scheme lot nationalising the two routes was published on 1st November, 1974. The petitioner filed her objections and the schemes were approved under G.O.Ms. No. 727, Home (Transport) Department, dated 3rd June, 1975. The petitioner has earlier filed W.P. No. 7392 of 1973 relating to the route Chittoor to Tirupathi oia Puthalpat ana that was dismissed by Obul Reddi, J. (as he then was). Writ Appeal No. 425 of 1974 is preferred against the order in this writ petition. Writ Petition No. 3187 of 1975 has been filed by the same permit-holder in respect of nationalisation of the other route Chittoor to Tirupathi via Penumur.
(3.) It may be mentioned herein that, even when the draft scheme was published, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 606 of 1975 challenging it and that was dismissed even at the admission stage with the observation that all the contentions raised in the writ petition might be raised before the Hon'ble Minister for Transport, who would hear the scheme as finalised. As we haw said, after hearing all the objections, the Hon'ble Minister approved the scheme arc it was published in G.O.Ms. No.727, dated 3rd June, 1975.