NAIB TRANSPORT PRIVATE LTD Vs. S N MUKHERJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by Messrs Naib Transport (Private) Ltd., under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against the Regional Transport Authority. The application seeks for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders dated the 24th/26th December, 1956 passed by the Regional Transport Authority. Calcutta Region. By that order the Regional Transport Authority refused to grant two stage carriage permits in favour of Messrs. Naib Transport (Private) Ltd. authorising them to ply their two buses Nos. WBS-781 and WBS-759 on route 12C of Calcutta. There was an appeal before the Appellate Sub-Committee of the State Transport Authority, West Bengal. The Appellate Sub-Committee also rejected the appeal of the applicant. The present application is directed against that order.

(2.) The two points, of objection that have been urged before me by Dr. Atul Chandra Gupta on behalf of the applicant may be broadly stated. His first objection is that the Regional Transport Authority misdirected itself in refusing the stage carriage permit to the applicant on the ground or nationalisation of transport. His second objection is that the Regional Transport Authority also took into consideration the congestion in Howrah, which according to the applicant is also not a permissible consideration. In fact the substance of the objections of the applicant to the order refusing permit is that the State Transport Authority took into consideration matters not permitted to be considered under Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

(3.) The facts of the case lie within a small compass. The applicant had two buses Nos. WBS 781 and WBS 759 on route No. 33 of Calcutta covered by permits which were valid till 9-11-1956. The applicant applied in the prescribed form for grant of stage carriage permits for those two buses to ply on route No. 12C which is a route from Barisha to Howrah Station. Calcutta. The application was opposed by the Director of Operation. State Transport who filed objections. The main objections of the Director of Transport to the grant of permit to the two buses in favour of the applicant in route 12C are four-fold. The first objection is that the number of buses in the particular route in Calcutta could not be increased without an order of Government. The second objection was that there were 23 buses now plying on that route. When the State Transport was operating on that route it had only 12 buses. The traffic between Howrah Station and Esplanade is now carried by over 100 State buses, trams as well as 23 buses on route 12C. Therefore, it is said that no extra bus was necessary. It is also said that there will be a loss of government revenue if more private buses were allowed to ply on the route. The third objection was that the bus stand at Howrah station was already too congested and there was no room for additional buses. In fact the Superintendent of Police. Howrah. wrote to the Directorate not to put any more buses at the . Howrah Station. Fourthly, the Director of Operation, State Transport, objected on the ground that for those reasons an application from the owners of buses on routes 12, 12A and 12B to extend their routes to Howrah Station was rejected last year by the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta. A public hearing was granted to the applicant under Section 57 (5) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939.