A VEDACHALA MUDALIAR Vs. CENTRAL ROAD TRAFFIC BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling upon the Central Road Traffic Board, Madras, to send the records in its proceedings No. 9820-A 1/47 and to quash the order made by it on 26 June, 1947.

(2.) The petitioner is the proprietor of a bus transport service named Sri Gandipan Bus Service. He had been granted permits to run three buses on the route from Madras to Mahabalipuram. On the 1 of December, 1946, the petitioner applied to the Regional Transport Officer, Vellore, for permission to divert his buses on the route between Madras and Mahabalipuram at a village named Yechur to a village called Manamady, 2-1/2 miles from Yechur. Prior to this application there was a petition from the villagers of Manamady praying for a diversion of the buses plying from Madras to Mahabalipuram to their village. The Regional Transport Authority published a notification on the 25 March, 1947, under Section 57(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, intimating that an application had been received from the petitioner for diversion of his buses running between Madras and Mahabalipuram via Manamady, fixing the date for representation to the 10 April, 1947, and the date for consideration of the application to the 26 April, 1947. Apparently no representations were received and on the 28 April, 1947, the Regional Transport Officer, Vellore, passed an order permitting the petitioner to run his buses in the same route from Madras to Mahabalipuram via Manamady until further orders.

(3.) The second respondent to this application is Sri Thirupurasundari Bus Service, Tirukalikundram. On its behalf an appeal was preferred to the Central Road Traffic Board on the 29 April, 1947. It may be mentioned that the second respondent was not a person who had objected to the grant of the permission sought by the petitioner and he was not entitled to prefer an appeal under Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Under that provision it is only a person providing trans-port facilities who, having opposed the grant of a permit, is aggrieved by the grant thereof that is entitled to prefer an appeal to the prescribed authority within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner. This was not apparently realised by the appellate authority, the Central Road Traffic Board, which purported to allow the appeal by its order dated 25 June, 1947. It is this order that is sought to be quashed and it runs as follows: The appeal is allowed. The diversion granted to the respondent Messrs. Gandipan Bus Service is cancelled restoring the original route as before, i.e., from Madras to Mahabalipuram. Against this order, the petitioner preferred a petition to the Provincial Government but the Government by its order dated 17 December, 1947, declined to interfere with the order of the Central Road Traffic Board. The petitioner thereupon filed the application before us for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order on the ground that the appeal by the second respondent was not competent and the Central Road Traffic Board, the first respondent, acted without jurisdiction in pur- porting to allow the appeal of the second respondent and in cancelling the permission already granted to him.