KASHINATH DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Malay Kumar Basu, learned senior counsel representing the writ petitioner pursuant to the prayer of the writ petition argued that the Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata Region has not been constituted in terms of sub- section (2) of Section 68 of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Therefore, the representation as was considered by the so-called Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata by holding meeting on 12th September, 2017 is bad in law and is liable to be quashed by stretching relief as sought for in the writ petition. Mr. Basu relied upon the case of M/s. Sheik Hussain and Sons -vs- State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors . reported in AIR 1964 Andhra Pradesh 36, specially referred to paragraphs 11, 12, 13 and 14, which are set out:

(2.) Mr. Rameswar Bhattacharya, learned counsel representing the respondent no.5 supporting the impugned resolution dated 12th September, 2017 and relying upon Sections 86 and also 68 of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 submitted that in the meeting the Chairman along with one non-official and one official member were very much present. Further submitted that though six other members had attended the meeting as invitee members, there is no bar in the Act that any invitee member would not be allowed to remain present in any such Board meeting.

(3.) Mr. Sen, learned Additional Government Pleader representing the State also supporting the resolution adopted by the Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata Region and adopting the submission of Mr. Bhattacharya, tried to impress upon the Court that while earlier resolution dated 19th January, 2017 cancelling the permit of the writ petitioner was not challenged, the challenge of the resolution dated 12th September, 2017 would be a futile exercise.