SURAJDEO SINGH Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application the petitioners pray for quashing of Annexure 1, the order passed by the East Bihar Regional Transport Authority on 9-6-1973, whereby the two petitioners have been directed to carry mail in the stage carriage which is being operated by the petitioners. They also pray for quashing of Annexure 2 the order of State Transport Appellate Tribunal passed in revision. By this order the Appellate Tribunal had dismissed on 2-1-1975 the revision application of the petitioners directed against Annexure 1.

(2.) The relevant facts giving rise, to this writ application may be compactly stated: The two petitioners have a permanent stage carriage permit on Purnea-Katihar-Manehari and Jogbani-Katihar-Manihari routes respectively. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Purnea, recommended the names of the petitioners for carrying the mail from Purnea and Katihar on their respective stage carriages. After giving notices to the petitioners and hearing them the Regional Transport Authority ordered petitioner No. 1 to carry mails from Purnea and petitioner No. 2 from Katihar, failing which it was stated that the permit would be cancelled. Against this order the petitioners went in revision, which was dismissed. Hence this writ application challenging the orders aforesaid.

(3.) The contention of the petitioners is that under Section 47 (a) of the Motor Vehicles Act it is the "interest of public generally" which has to be taken into account. The expression aforesaid refers only to the interest of travelling public and is not comprehensive enough to permit exercise of power for the interest of general public as distinguished from the travelling public. It was further contended that under Section 48(3)(xxi) a condition, in relation to grant of permit, could be imposed at the time of initial grant but not subsequently. Lastly, it was contended that Rule 55 (i) of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Rules is ultra vires of Section 68 of the Act.