SUPRAVA DEB ROY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for Writs of Mandamus and Certiorari. It questions the competency of the order of the State Transport Authority, Assam, dated 21 -6 -52.

(2.) THE facts leading to the petition are as follows: Tenders were invited for Contract Carriage (Taxi) Permits in Cachar region. The petitioner submitted an application for a permit. The Regional Transport Authority, Cachar, granted one taxi permit to the petitioner for a period of 3 years with effect from 15 -4 -52. The order was duly communicated to the petitioner. In pursuance of the terms contained in the order, the petitioner paid the requisite permit fee and a permit was issued in her favour. The petitioner then purchased a vehicle No. ASA 1028 for a sum of Rs. 7000/ - and began plying it. On 2 -7 -52 the petitioner was informed by a letter from the Secretary, State Transport Authority, Assam, that Subhas Chandra Sen, respondent 2, had been granted a permit in her place. In pursuance of the appellate order, the Regional Transport Authority, Cachar, directed the petitioner to surrender her permit by a letter dated 16 -7 -52.

(3.) THE petition is supported by an affidavit. The facts stated in the petition have not been challenged on behalf of the respondents. The order of the Regional Authority granting a permit to the petitioner was admittedly appealable under Section 64, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. An appeal was preferred by respondent 2, Subhas Chandra Sen. In his appeal, Shrimati Suprava Dev Roy, the present petitioner, was placed in the list of respondents. The Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority, Cachar, was also impleaded. Besides him, there were 6 other respondents, including the present petitioner.