UPENDRA KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the order, as contained in Annexure -6 being file noting and order by which a permit granted to him by the authority as constituted under Sec. 68 of M.V. Act in terms of Section 72 of the Act has been stayed without even hearing him or noticing him.

(2.) THE order -sheet shows a very dismal picture wherein the statutory body as envisaged under Sec. 68 of the Act has functioned more as a private body dealing with statutory matter by passing the verbal order and not in any properly constituted proceeding. This is destructive of all principle of administrative law. State has filed a counter affidavit and parties have been heard.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that he had made a statutory application for grant of permanent State Carrier Permit. The time table was duly put up. There were two objections. Both the objectors then compromised and a revised time table drawn up, as per compromise. The matter was then placed before the statutory body, which is the authority as contemplated under Sec. 68 of the M.V. Act on 16.4.2007. The proceedings of the authority of that day are Annexure -4. The Deputy Transport Commissioner -cum -Secretary of the authority and the Divisional Commissioner - cum -Chairman of the authority were present in the meeting. They considered the entire matter including the compromise, which is noted in the said proceedings itself and took a decision to grant the permit. Permit was then issued. Petitioner started to ply his vehicle on basis of permit so issued. Subsequently, one person Sri Rafat Ali Khan filed an objection before the authority that the revised timing as per the compromise on basis whereof permit was issued was not published and it clashes with his timing and as such the permit should be recalled. The notings of the file are appended as Annexure -6. It shows that the matter was in the file dealt and brought to the notice of the Chairman of the authority. The Chairman of the authority was of the opinion that the permit be stayed and the revised time be published. The order -sheet discloses that the Chairman then issued a Verbal order to the Secretary directing him to stay the permit and publish the revised timing. Accordingly the Secretary of the authority issued order, the result whereof is that the petitioner 'svehicle is stranded without a permit.