DILIP KUMAR DUTTA Vs. R T A HOOGHLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, 15 in number, are existing operators on Bus Route No.17, Chinsurah to Tarakeswar, and their association has been brought on the record as Petitioner No.16. The 15 operators are stated to be plying 15 buses on the route. The R.T.A., Hooghly (Respondent No.1) published a notice inviting application for 5 additional buses on the said route, to be submitted by February 24, 1964 (Annex. A, p. 17). The petitioner's case is that they submitted objections to the aforesaid proposal in the R.T.A.'s Office on February 24, 1964, on the ground of injury to their interests, but that the R.T.A. gave no notice of the date of hearing of the of the petitioner's objections nor gave them and hearing; that without a hearing on the 95 applications for the additional permits, on October 8, 1964, the R.T.A. granted 5 additional stage carriage permits to opposite parties 2-9 by the resolution at Annex. A (p. 20).

(2.) This Rule has been obtained against the impugned resolution of the R.T.A. challenging its validity on various grounds. It is opposed by separate affidavits by Respondent No.1, by Respondent Nos.2-4, 8 and by Respondent No.9.

(3.) The first ground urged on behalf of the petitioners is that the R.T.A., in disposing of the applications for the additional permits, did not comply with the requirements of Section 57 of the Act.