NANDINI SINHA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

(2.) THE appeal and stay application both are taken up as on day's list for final hearing.

(3.) THIS appeal has been preferred challenging the refusal to pass any interim order in the writ application as moved by the appellant, alleging illegality on grant of permit in favour of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on the ground that such permit was granted after lapse of the offer letter. The writ petitioner/ appellant is the existing operator in the route in question. It appears from section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 that the revision is maintainable before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and the writ petitioner/appellant had the alternative speedy and efficacious remedy by filing a revisional application under the statutory provision. Section 90 reads such:-"90. Revision-The State Transport Appellate Tribunal may, on an application made to it, call for the record of any case in which an order has been made by a State Transport Authority or Regional transport Authority againstwhich no appeal lies, and if it appears to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal that the order made by the State transport Authority or Regional Transport Authority is improper or illegal, the State Transport Appellate Tribunal may pass such order in relation to the case as it deems fit and every such order shall be final: provided that the State Transport Appellate Tribunal shall not entertain any application from a person aggrieved by an order of a state Transport Authority or Regional Transport Authority, unless the application is made within thirty days from the date of the order: provided further that the State Transport Appellate Tribunal may entertain the application after the expiry of the said period of thirty days, if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by good and sufficient cause from making the application in time: provided also that the State Transport Appellate Tribunal shall not pass an order under this section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.