SUSHIL KUMAR SEN GUPTA Vs. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON or about June 2, 1961, the respondent Regional Transport Authority, burdwan, published, under Rule 55a of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, a notice inviting applications for grant of five stage carriage permits for Burdwan-Guskara route via Suri Road. In response to the notice, about 197 applications were received, amongst them there was one by the petitioner and another by respondent No. 3 firm. The Secretary of the Respondent Regional transport Authority, thereupon, published the applications, under Rule 57 of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, and invited representations in connection therewith. No representation, however, was received. Thereupon, on February 12, 1962, the Regional Transport authority considered the application and passed the following resolution: "considered the cases of all applicants with due regard to their solvency and experience in transport business. Procedures laid down in secs. 47 and 57 of the M. V. Act were duly followed. Of the six temporary permit holders of the route, five (i. e. , except M/s. Raghu Nath Transport)have no other permanent or temporary permits anywhere in the district. No complaints have so far been received against them. M/s. Raghunath Transport Co. hold a permanent Stage Carriage permit on the route "bud-Bud Bolgona". Heard all the applicants who offered themselves for hearing. In consideration of all the particulars, offered by the applicants it appeared that five of the existing six operators were most suitable candidates and they were ready with vehicles and they also offered to produce new vehicles of 1956 or later models within a reasonable time. Hence resolved that a permanent stage carriage permit on the ruote be granted to each of the following candidates on condition that the grantees would place a new vehicle of 1956 or later model by 31-3-62 failing which the permits will be liable to be Cancelled. (a) M/s. Subhajatra Transport Co. (b) Sri Sushil Kumar Sen Gupta. (c) Sm. Surekha Choudhury. (d) M|s. Multifarious Trading Co. (e) Judhisthir Dutta. " the appendent No. 3 firm, namely raghunath Transport Company, felt aggrieved by the relationi and preferred appeal before the Appellate sub-Committee of the State Transport Authority. That appeal was disposed of by the Sub-Committee, on April 24, 1963, with the following observations:

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the appellate order, the petitioner moved this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for a Writ of Certiorari for the quashing of the appellate order and for a mandate restraining the respondents fom giving effect or taking advantage of the order, and obtained this: rule.

(3.) MR. Susil Kumar Biswas, learned advocate for the petitioner, argued three points in support of this Rule, He contended that under Rule 84 (d) of the bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, the appellate authority may "confirm, vary or set aside the order" appealed against but has no power to remand. He further contended that the reasons given for directing a remand were untenable in law, he also contended that the order of remand should not have been made in the instant case, because the defect pointed out by the Appellate Sub-Committee was not such as occasioned a failure of justice and the order made by the regional Transport Authority should not have been reversed, because of the provisions contained in section 134 (2)of the Motor Vehicles Act.