LAWS(MPH)-1986-2-42

SUJANMAL Vs. STATE TRANSPORT

Decided On February 12, 1986
SUJANMAL Appellant
V/S
STATE TRANSPORT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India directed against the order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.

(2.) THE material facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are as follows: Respondent No. 2, the Regional Transport Authority, Indore, invited applications for grant of permit under Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for one daily return trip on the route Meghnagar, Sardarpur via Jhabua, Ranapur, Para, Bavdi, Chhalnimata, Tirla, Rajgarh, Chhadawad and Piparn. The petitioner was one of the applicants. The Regional Transport Authority, after considering the claims of the various applicants, granted permission to the petitioner on the aforesaid route. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, after hearing the petitioner and the objectors, proposed the timings for the new service of the petitioner on the route in question. That time table was provisionally approved by the Regional Transport Authority without hearing the parties. Aggrieved by that order, respondent No. 3 preferred a revision petition under Section 64-A of the Act before the State Transport Appeal ate Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the revision petition and directed that the Regional Transport Authority should itself hear the parties and then proceed to pass an order afresh. The Regional Transport Authority thereafter again fixed the same timings as were proposed by the Secretary earlier by observing that the Tribunal had: not precluded the Regional Transport Authority from assigning the same timings. Respondent No. 3 again preferred a revision petition before the Tribunal, which was allowed and the Tribunal remanded the case to the Regional Transport Authority to consider the question of timings afresh, in the light of the order passed by the Tribunal. Aggrieved by the order of remand passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner has filed this petition.

(3.) THE petition accordingly fails and is summarily dismissed.