STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. SANKAR AUTOMOBILES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocate for the parties.

(2.) CHALLENGING the judgment and order dated 20th September,, 2006 passed by the learned Trial Judge in W. P. No. 1393 of 2006, this appeal has been preferred. By the impugned judgment under appeal learned Trial Judge extended the life of the offer letter dated 12th January, 2004 as was issued and thereby by a mandatory order directed grant of route permit in a route which is touching/originating from the prohibiting zone, central business district, Kolkata in view of the prohibitory notification dated 6th August, 2004. The logic as advanced to grant mandatory order by the learned Trial Judge is that since in the case of Sujata Ganguly vs. State of West Bengal, being F. M. A. No. 604 of 2004 there was an injunction order restraining to grant any permit as passed on 25th July, 2004 which subsequently after final hearing stood modified to this extent that the permit could be issued in respect of the routes irrespective of the fact that may traverse the prohibitory zone in the cases where offer letter was earlier issued. It is the contention of the appellant before us that the offer letter as was issued on 12th January, 2004 with a rider of its expiry after 30 days faced a natural death. But the writ petitioner/respondent moved a writ application in the High Court at Calcutta praying for extension of such offer letter to produce the vehicle in W. P. No. 6120 (w) of 2003 in which by the judgment and order dated 26th April, 2004 Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. passed an order extending the tune of the offer letter by a further period of two months with another direction of placement of a vehicle having Bharat Stage II compliance norms. The relevant portion of the order of Bhaskar Bhattacharya, j. passed in the writ application aforesaid reads thus:

(3.) ON the basis of the said order it is the submission of the learned Advocate for the appellant that the offer letter in terms of the order of the High Court dated 26th April, 2004 accordingly got its life for a further period of two months, that is upto 25th June, 2004 but the writ petitioner failed to produce the vehicle and as such the permit could not be issued. It is contended further that the order of injunction passed in the case of Sujata Ganguly (supra) as has been considered by the learned Trial Judge as a ground by which the Transport authority was restrained to grant any permit and as such petitioner should be allowed a chance when by the final judgment in the case the injunction order was vacated, also is not a real state of affairs in view of the fact that the injunction order passed the said appeal Sujata Ganguly (supra) restraining grant of any permit was passed on 26th July, 2004 whereas the writ petitioner failed to produce the vehicle even in terms of the order of the High Court dated 26th April, 2004 within 25th June, 2004 upto which offer letter had life. Hence, with that contention it is the submission that the judgment under appeal is not sustainable. The writ petitioner/respondent has reiterated their contention as made in the writ application and supported the judgment by contending that in view of the injunction order passed in the case Sujata Ganguly (supra) dated 26th July, 2004 as the Transport Authority had no right to issue any permit, once the interim injunction was lifted the writ petitioner accrued the right to place his vehicle as per earlier offer letter. Having regard to the rival contention of the parties the only point is required to be considered whether in terms of the case of Sujata Ganguly (supra) whereby and whereunder the Court directed that the permit could be granted irrespective of affecting the Central Business district Zone, Kolkata in the event offer letter as already issued now to be tested so far as its legal implication. To check the air pollution as well as congestion of the vehicle in the Central Business District of Kolkata a prohibitory notification was issued banning grant of permit in respect of the routes as would traverse through the said prohibitory zone either by originating and/or terminating its route and/or by passing through the said area in question. The notification of 6th August, 2004 reads thus: