DHANANJOY DAS AND ANR. Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, APPELLATE BOARD CONSTITUTED UNDER THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1939 AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two rules can be disposed of by one common judgment as common questions' of law have -been raised by the counsel for the petitioners. Rule No. 70/60 arises out of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by one Sri Dhananjoy Das. The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that the Regional Transport Authority, Gauhati invited applications for stage, carriage permit for the Barpeta -Sarthebari -Darrang route in the District of Kamrup. The petitioner along with respondent No. 2 and several other persons applied for the grant of the permit.

(2.) THREE main points have been raised by Dr Medhi who appears for the petitioners in these cases. He has firstly urged that the constitution of the Appellate Board was not proper. Mr. Vaghaiwalla who acted as the Chairman of the State Transport Authority was not duly appointed Chairman in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Secondly it was urged that the constitution of the Board which heard the appeal, was not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed under the Act. No ad hoc Board could be constituted. The Members who constituted the Board and heard the appeal, were not duly appointed as the Members.

(3.) THE State Transport Authority is constituted under the provisions of Section 44 of the Act, the relevant portion of which reads as follows :