JASWANT SINGH Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JAWANT Singh, petitioner, a holder of a non temporary stage carriage permit on Churu to Dhirasar route, has filed this writ petition with the following prayer: that the writ petition may kindly be accepted and a writ, in the nature of certiorari or other writ, order or direction which may be deemed just and expedient in the circumstances of the case be kindly issued and set aside the aforesaid order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur dated 8 -1 -1981 and the impugned resolution of the Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner dated 6 -11 -1979 be kindly ordered to be restored. Any other relief which may be deemed just and expedient in the circumstances of the case be kindly granted. Cost of this writ petition may kindly be ordered to be awarded to the petitioner.

(2.) PETITIONERS ' permit was valid upto 31st December, 1979. The petitioner submitted a renewal application for the said permit before 120 days of the expiry date, as required by Section 58(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (hereinafter as 'that Act'). This application was published on July 5, 1979 in the Rajasthan Gazette for inviting objections which were to be submitted within 30 days. In the Rajasthan Gazette, dated the 27th September, 1979, it was notified that the said renewal application published on July 5, 1979 along with objections can be considered by the Regional Transport Authority in its meeting, dated the 6th December, 1979 and it was considered on 6th December, 1979. The objector -non -petitioner No. 3 was absent. The Regional Transport Authority resolved to renew the permit in favour of the petitioner and rejected the objection vide Annexure 3. The non -petitioner No. 3 filed revision application before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur, (hereinafter 'the Tribunal'). The Tribunal accepted the revision petition and remanded the case to the Regional Transport Authority for hearing the renewal application and the objections and then deciding it afresh.

(3.) SHRI Maheshwari invited my attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in D. Nataraja Mudalia v. R.T.A. : [1979]1SCR551 wherein their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed that 'a permit holder has an ordinary right of renewal unless it is shown that outweighing result. Permits are not bounty but right, restricted reasonably by the Motors Vehicles Act.'. In any case, the Tribunal could have itself considered the objection instead of remanding the case, argued Mr. Maheshwari. It was then argued that the Tribunal, itself, held that the member of the Regional Transport Authority could decide, in what manner objections are to be dealt with, namely, to decide alongwith renewal application or separately. Mr. Maheshwari also pointed out that the objection, if any, is covered by Section 60(1)(c) of the Act for which it is discretionary for the Regional Transport Authority to make inquiry and decide after providing opportunity to the permit holder.