ABDUL GAFOOR Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question in this writ petition is regarding the validity of the order of the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the R.T.A') dated October 25, 1975 granting three temporary permits, one each to the non petitioners Nos. 2 to 4, on the Ajmer -Ramsar route. In their applications for grant of temporary permits, the purpose for which the permit was required has been described by the non petitioner No. 2 as "under Sec. 62(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act to meet the temporary need No Vehicle on the route" and by non petitioner No. 3 as "to carry passengers C 62" and by the non -petitioner No. 4 as "to meet particular temporary need. Under Sec. 62(1)(c) of the M.V. Act." In the impugned resolution of the R.T.A. dated October 25, 1975 it was held that there were three vacancies existing within the scope fixed for the aforesaid route and as such a temporary need existed along with a permanent need. The R.T.A., therefore, granted three temporary permits to the non -petitioners Nos. 2 to 4, as mentioned above. In the permits issued to the non -petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 the purpose of the journey was described as "to ply regular service on Ajmer Ramsar via Srinagar route."

(2.) It has been held by this Court in several cases that mere repetition of the phrase that a temporary need co existed with a permanent need on a particular route was not enough but the RTA should apply its mind and come to a definite conclusion that a specified temporary need did exist on the route in question. The decision of this Court in Gafoor vs. Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur : 1975 WLN 700 may be referred in this connection. Mr. R.R. Vyas appearing for respondent Lal Chand was unable to defend the grant of temporary permits in the present case in view of the earlier decisions of this Court. As I have observed above, neither the non petitioners Nos. 2, 3, 4 in their applications for grant of permits specified the particular temporary need for which a temporary permits was required by them nor the RTA while granting temporary permits to the said non -petitioners by the impugned resolution gave particulars of the specified temporary need, which is alleged to have existed. In these circumstances, the grant of temporary permits to the non -petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 by the R.T.A. is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The resolution of the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur dated October, 25, 1975 granting three temporary permits, one each to the non -petitioners Nos. 2 to 4, on Ajmer -Ramsar route is quashed. The temporary permits issued to the non petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 in pursuance of the aforesaid resolution of the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur are also set aside. The parties are left to bear their own costs.