K BHASKARA RAO Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application filed by the petitioner for grant of a pucca permit along with his objections to the Notification under section 57(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act 4 of 1939 was returned by the Regional Transport Authority, the 1st respondent herein as not entertainable by his order dated 15.3.85. That order is impugned in this writ petition.

(2.) the facts are not in dispute. Its effect in law alone has to be judged. The 2nd respondent obtained a stage carriage permit for the route Khammam-Jaggayyapet in respect of his vehicle A.P.P.2200. His permit expired on 5.10.1979 as he has not applied for its renewal under section 58 of the Act as his vehicle has become unroadworthy. However he applied in 1984 for renewal and the Regional Transport Authority rejected the same on 10.12.84 that the permit in his favour cannot be restored as he did not apply for the renewal within time and the permit has lapsed on 5.10.1979. Against the said order the 2nd respondent filed W.P.No. 17014/84 and this court by its judgment dated 28.10.84 held that the permit has lapsed on 5.10.79 and the question of renewal does not arise but, however the application of the petitioner can be treated as one under section 46 of the Act and the same may be disposed of accordingly. After the said order the Regional Transport Authority issued a notification under section 57(3) of the Act stating that he has taken up the consideration of the application of the respondent as per the orders of the. High Court and his application and the representation received in connection therewith will be taken up for consideration by him. To that notification the present petitioner besides objecting for granting of permit to the 2nd respondent also applied for grant of a permit in his favour. This application of the petitioner was rejected treating it as not entertainable on two grounds. It is necessary to extract those two grounds in full. "(1) The application filed by Sri K.Bhaskar Rao for the grant of permit it is neither in pursuance of notification under section 57(2) of Motor Vehicles'Act or any specific orders from the competent court are obtained by him to consider his application as such. (2) The Notification issued under section 57(3) was only a process in disposal of application in pursuance of the orders of Hon'ble High Court of A.P.Hyderabad in W.P.No. 17014/84 and the application filed by Sri K.Bhaskar Rao, for the permit along with his objection letter is not entertainable.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents while supporting the impugned order raised an additional ground stating that the petitioner can only be a non-applicant objecting to grant of permit to him but cannot himself be an applicant for permit as he has not made the application not less than six weeks from the date of its issuance as contemplated under first part of sub-section (2) of section 57.