SHER SINGH Vs. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY GWALIOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of a case relating to the grant of stage carriage permits on the route, Tikamgarh-Gwalior via Niwari, jhansi and Dabra. This route is inter-statal and inter-regional falling within the states of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. The portion of the route which is within the State of Madhya Pradesh falls within two regions viz. , Rewa and gwalior. Under the inter-statal agreement two single trip permits can be issued for this route by the Madhya Pradesh Authorities. Ratanlal who is respondent No. 3 to this petition made an application for permit on the route on 20th October, 1964 to the Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior, No action was taken on that application and on 20th December, 1964 the Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior decided to invite fresh applications. This order, however, was not carried out and no notification was published inviting applications. In the meantime, the petitioner and some others applied to Regional Transport Authority, Rewa for getting permits on this route. The petitioner's application was made on 15th July, 1966 and was published in the gazette on 2nd September, 1966 along with other applications. The State transport Authority realising that the exercise of concurrent jurisdiction by the regional Transport Authorities of Rewa and Gwalior in the matter of grant of permits on this route may not be in the interest of the public and may result in conflict, issued a direction that the applications for permits on this route, though received by both the Authorities, shall be decided only by the Regional Transport authority, Gwalior. In view of this direction of the State Transport Authority, the regional Transport Authority, Rewa sent all the applications received by it for grant of permits on this route, including the application of the petitioner, to the regional Transport Authority, Gwalior. It seenis that the respondent No. 3 came to know of the order of the Regional transport Authority, Gwalior deciding to invite fresh applications sometime in July, 1966 and on 15th July, 1966 he filed a revision against that order before the State transport Authority. This revision was allowed by the order of the State Transport authority on 31st May, 1968, in which it was held that the Regional Transport authority, Gwalior should have decided the application of the respondent No. 3 and should not have passed the order inviting fresh applications. On this ground the order proposing to invite fresh applications was set aside and the Regional transport Authority, Gwalior was directed to first determine the application of the respondent No. 3. After this order, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, gwalier by a memo anted 4th June, 1903 returned the applications including the application of the petitioner, which were received from, the Regional Authority rewa, back to that Authority on the ground that applications submitted to one authority cannot be transferred to another Authority. The Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior then published the application of the respondent No. 3 in July, 1968 and proposed to consider that application alone on 24th September, 1968. The petitioner then filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution praying that the order of the State Transport Authority in revision and the order of the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior, returning the petitioner's application to the Regional Transport Authority, Rewa, be quashed. It is also prayed that the Regional Transport Authority, Gwalior, be directed to dispose of the applications of the respondent No. 3 and the petitioner together in accordance with law.

(2.) THE main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that by the direction of the State Transport Authority issued on 16th November, 1966 the regional Transport Authority, Gwalior got jurisdiction to decide the applications that were made at Rewa including the application of the petitioner, and therefore, the Secretary. Regional Transport Authority. Gwalior should not have sent back those applications to the Regional Transport Authority, Rewa. It is also argued that as the applications of the petitioner and respondent No. 3 are all ripe for hearing, these applications and such other applications for permits on this route which may also be ripe for hearing should be heard together by the Regional Transport authority. Gwalior. In answer, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 argued that the direction of the State Transport Authority was in excess of the power conferred on that Authority and therefore the Regional Transport Authority, gwalior rightly refused to decide the applications made to the Regional Transport authority, Rewa.

(3.) THE rival contentions raised in this petition relate to construction of subsections (3) and (4) of Section 44 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 which read as follows: