JANTA MOTOR TRANSPORT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD Vs. CHAIRMAN SOUTH CHOTANAGPUR REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner which is a registered Co-operative Society under the Bihar & Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1935 for quashing the orders contained in Annexures '5' and '6' and for a direction to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to grant permanent timing to it in respect of a permanent stage carriage for which permit for five years on Ranchi Murisemar via Kuru Tori, Latehar, Daltonganj, Pandwamore, Garhwa and Nagar was granted by the Chotanagpur Regional Transport Authority, Ranchi, at its meeting held on 23rd/24th February, 1972.

(2.) It appears that the petitioner, in order to ply the stage carriage proposed some timings and a provisional timing chart was issued to it by the Secretary, South Chotanagpur Regional Transport Authority, Ranchi (respondent No. 2) on 26th April, 1972 (vide Annexure '2'). Subsequently, however, that timing chart was modified and another provisional timing (vide Annexure '3') was issued by the same authority on 26th August, 1972. The timing allowed to the petitioner (vide Annexure '3') was, later on, set aside by the Chairman, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bihar. Patna on 1.6th May, 1973 and the provisional tuning chart (Annexure '2') was restored. Subsequently, the petitioner applied for change of the timing which was provisional and for fixing permanent timing. The Chairman, South Chotanagpur Regional Transport Authority, Ranchi (respondent No. 1), however, held that the permit of the operator is a permanent stage carriage permit and the timings of service running on a permanent permit cannot be changed during the currency of the same. According to him, it was possible only at the time of renewal of the permit. Accordingly, the prayer of petitioner for changing the timings and giving a permanent timing was not acceded to (vide Annexure '5').

(3.) The petitioner preferred an application in revision before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bihar, Patna, and the learned Chairman of the said Tribunal held that the petitioner had wrongly assumed that the time-table which had been initially fixed was provisional. He has, in his Impugned order relied upon the order passed by the Chairman of the South Chotanagpur Regional Transport Authority that the time-table that was fixed was permanent and not liable to change. He, therefore, dismissed the application in revision, (vide Annexure ('6').