LAKHMI CHAND RATHORE Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNALGWALIOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 22fi of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks the quashing of the order dated 16-12-1981 (Annexure 'D') passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') cancelling the national permit granted to the petitioner by the Regional Transport Authority, Sagar.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that by a letler dated 28-1-1977 of the Deputy Secretary, Government of Madhya Pradesh (Home Department), a quota of 7 public carrier national permits was allotted to Sagar region. Consequently, applications were invited by a notification dated 15-2-1977. After receipt of the applications, extracts thereof were published in the M. P. Rajpatra dated 6-5-1977 inviting objections, but no objections were received. The Government of India had issued guidelines for grant of national permits according tc which, 50% of the national permits were to be given to persons holding inter-statal permits, 25% to operators holding statal or regional permits, 10% were to be reserved for ex-army personnel and 15% of permits were to be reserved for new entrepreneurs including drivers holding heavy motor vehicle licence. On the mutual and unanimous agreement between the various applicants, out of the quota of 7 public carrier national permits, 3 were reserved for inter-statal permit-holders, 2 for statal or regional permit-holders, one for ex-army personnnel and one for new entrant. The Regional Transport Authority adopted the marking sys-tem formula based on model of the vehicle, experience and coverage. In that light, the Regional Transport Authority considered the respective merits of the various applicants who had applied for grant of national permits and by his order dated 4-10-1977 (Annexure C) granted two permits in the category of statal or regional operators--one to the petitioner Lakhmichand and another to one Nirbhaya Singh Rathor (who is not a party to this petition) on the basis of highest marks obtained by each one of them. Other applications, including the application of respondent No. 3 Devhans Chaurasia, were rejected as they received less marks than the aforesaid two applicants. Permits to some other applicants in other categories \vere also granted by the Regional Transport Authority with which we are not concerned in this petition. In appeal, the Tribunal after about 4 years, set aside the order of the Regional Transport Authority daled 4-10-77 (Annexure C) in so far as it related to the grant of permit to the petitioner and granted Ihe permit to respondent No. 3 Devhans Chaurasia against which the petitioner has filed this petition.

(3.) It was not disputed before us that the Regional Transport Authority allotted marks to the applicants who had applied for the grant of public carrier national permits on the basis of model of the vehicle, number of permits coverage, giving first importance to the experience and second to the condition of vehicle. Marks were deducted for the adverse record perlaining to 2 years prior to the date of arguments before the Regional Transport Authority.