RINA MAITY Vs. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Court : A question somewhat complex in nature, would appear to have been raised in this case. This country is reeling under the strain of population explosion. Whenever applications are invited by authorities, applications received by them are always several times the number of vacancies. The concerned authorities are often at a loss as to how they should select the required few, especially, as often is the case, when on merit and other considerations, at least twice the number of the vacancies are found to be eligible. Where there was appropriate statutory provision as to the methodology to be followed in performing a public duty, the authority concerned was of course well protected. In the absence of valid guidelines in the statute, however, the task of the concerned authorities in conducting and concluding duties such as a process of selection, was often quite hazardous and their decisions were liable to be scrutinised and reviewed by the law Courts. As a result the States of course stood to suffer financially, as regards expenses for advertisements and other costs and charges, in the event the Courts should decide to set aside the selection.

(2.) There were five writ petitions in the cause list. A joint prayer was made by advocates for the parties that the five petitions may be heard analogously and disposed of by one judgment, as because the respondents as also the cause of action, were the same in all the five petitions. The prayer was allowed. Some of the candidates, in whose favour offer-letters had been issued by the respondent authorities, but were not impleaded in these writ petitions, applied and by consent of the advocates for the parties their applications were allowed. They were added as party respondents in the writ petitions. In this judgment I shall refer to them as the added respondents. The common grievance of the petitioners was, that the authorities wrongfully and in violation of specific statutory provisions, had refused to grant stage carriage permits in favour of the petitioners. The added respondents, some of whom had filed affidavits, of course contended that the selection was quite in accordance with law and no inervention by Court was called for. It was their further case that should the Court deem it fit, the STA be directed to intimate the unsuccessful candidates with the reasons for the refusal of their applications.

(3.) The facts of the case, in short, were that in pursuance of an advertisement published on January 14, 2001 in a Bengali daily newspaper, the Secretary, State Transport Authority, West Bengal (hereinafter referred to as "the STA", had invited offers from those who were interested to obtain permanent stage carriage permits, in the Calcutta-Siliguri route. There were 18 vacancies. Applications had been made and received by the STA from 206 intending operators. Almost 200 applicants had been interviewed individually, by the STA between March 5, 2001 and March 22, 2001. The petitioners came to learn, that on March 26, 2001 offer-letters had been issued in favour of the successful candidates. Admittedly, the STA had disposed of the application on the basis of its policy decision which had been taken on March 22, 2001. The policy decision being, that those applicants who were already the holders of route permits, would not be considered to be eligible to obtain permits in the selection process.