SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1962 Supreme(SC) 253

B. P. SINHA, J. C. SHAH, K. N. WANCHOO
Abdul Mateen – Appellant
Versus
Ram Kailash Pandey – Respondent


Advocates:
B.D.SHARMA, BASUDEV PRASAD, D.GOVERDHAN CHARY, M.K.RAMAMURTHY, R.K.GARG, S.C.AGRAWAL, S.P.Varma

Judgment

WANCHOO, J.: This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of the Patna High Court. Brief facts necessary for present purposes are these. It appears that a new route Gopalganj -Pahlezghat was advertised by the North Bihar Regional Transport Authority in July 1957 and applications were invited for permanent stage carriage permits and the advertisement stated that there were two vacancies on the route. A number of persons applied for the two permits and in January, 1958 the Regional Transport Authority granted permits to the appellant and another person. This order was taken in appeal to the Appellate Authority, which however failed. Thereafter Sudhakar Sharma, who is one of the respondents, before us, moved the High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution and in April 1960 the High Court quashed the order of the Appellate Authority on the basis of the judgment of this court in Ram Gopal v. Anant Prasad 1959 Supp (2) SCR 692: The case then went back to the Appellate Authority for re-hearing. The Appellate Authority thereupon modified the order of the Regional Transport Authority and the permit granted to the appellant was cancelled and in his place a permit was grante




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top