CENTRAL TRANSPORT SERVICE JAIPUR Vs. TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition filed by the General Transport Service, Jaipur, is directed against the order of the Transport Appellate Tribunal, dated 27-7-1968, whereby the resolution of the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur, dt. 11 6-1968, rejecting the renewal application of the respondent No. 3 M/s. General Motor Bus Service was set aside and its permit was ordered to be renewed.

(2.) THE petitioner firm carried on the business of a bus operator plying its vehicles on different routes in the city of Jaipur including route No. 5 which overlaps Jaipur-Sanganer via Lalkothi Durgapur route. M/s. General Motor Bus Service was holding a non-temporary stage carriage permit on the Jaipur-Sanganer route in respect of vehicle RJX 219. This permit was to expire on 15-12-1967. It is alleged that before the expiry of the term of the said permit, respondent No. 3 transferred the permit along with the bus RJX 219 to one Gella Ram Mistry but no permission for such a transfer was obtained by the respondent No. 3 under sec. 59 of the Motor Vehicles Act. On 11th September, 1967, an application was filed by one Chhatu Mal for renewing the permit of the respondent No. 3 for bus No RJX 219. It so appears that Chhatu Mal appended his signature to the renewal application on behalf of M/s. General Motor Bus Service, Jaipur. On publication of the said renewal application in the Rajasthan Gazette, under S. 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the petitioner submitted objections through its Manager Shri R. K. Mathur, before the Regional Transport Authority, wherein it was contended that the vehicle in question had been sold with the route permit by the respondent No 3 to one Gella Ram Mistry and that Chhatu Mal had no locus standi to apply for the renewal of the said permit. When the matter came up for consideration before the Regional Transport Authority, Chhatu Mal was examined and in his cross-examination he admitted that he did not hold any power of attorney on behalf of M/s General Motor Bus Service. THE Regional Transport Authority wanted the original bus owner to be produced in person before it but Chhatu Mal failed to do so. In view of the objections filed by the petitioner, the Regional Transport Authority came to the conclusion that there was no reason to disbelieve the affidavit filed by the Manager of the petitioner Shri R. K. Mathur, that the permit and the vehicle were transferred in an unauthorised manner by the original permit holder and therefore the renewal could not be granted on an application filed by Chhatu Mal.