(1.) The petitioner obtained a rule nisi calling upon the respondents to show cause why the resolution of the Chotanagpur Regional Transport Authority, respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the R. T. A.) dated 27-8-66 (Annexure B), the order of the Appeal Board (Annexure C) and the order dated 15-6-67 (Annexure D) passed by the Minister of Transport under Section 64A (Bihar Amendment) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called, the Act) be not quashed, and why the permit in question be not granted to the petitioner.
(2.) Respondent No. 1 published a notice in the Bihar Gazette dated the 6th February, 1963 inviting applications for the grant of one stage carriage permit for one up and down daily service for the 164 miles route. Ranchi Murisemar via Daltonganj and Relha. The petitioner, respondent nos. 4 and 5 and some others filed applications for the grant of the said permit. On the 27th of August, 1966, the R. T. A., considered the applications and the applicants present before the R. T. A. were heard, and their claims were recorded. The claims of the petitioner and respondent No. 4 Messrs. Ganga Motor Service were recorded as follows:
(3.) Mr. Lal Narayan Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner maintained night service between Ranchi and Garhwa, which is substantial portion of the route advertised, and was in a position to give better facilities to the public, but in spite of that respondent No. 1 (R. T. A.) granted permit to respondent No. 4, on extraneous consideration that the proprietor of M/S. Ganga Motor Service (respondent No. 4V was a displaced operator. On appeal also, the Appeal Board without applying his mind to the claims of the petitioner vis-a-vis respondent No. 4, rejected the appeal, without giving reasons as to why his application was being rejected. He has drawn our attention to the last paragraph of the order of the Appeal Board, the relevant portion of which reads: