Judgment

PALEKAR, J.:- Orders have been already passed dismissing the appeal and the reasons will be given now

2. This appeal arises out of an Order passed by the High Court of Rajasthan in Writ Petition No. 453 of 1969. The respondent Noor Mohammad, resident of Jaipur, submitted an application on 11-3-1968 to the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur, for the grant of a non-temporary stage carriage permit on Jaipur-Rohtak route via Shahpura-Katputli, Behror-Jahari. Objections were invited but no objections were filed. Besides the respondent. however, the State Road Transport Corporation and two other persons had applied for the grant of permit on this route. These two other persons were also absent. Only the respondent and the Corporation were present. The Regional Transport Authority did not take the application of the respondent into consideration by reason of a resolution passed by the State Transport Authority. Rajasthan. which was in force. That resolution dated January 27, 1969 and numbered Tr. S.T.A. I/69/31743 was duly notified and published on February 6. 1969 as follows

"In exercise of the powers under Section 44 and Section 3 (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act the State Transport Authority, Rajasthan resolves that with effect from the date of the publication of this resolution in the official Gazette, (1) The State Transport Authority shall hereinafter grant all types of permits, renewals, transfers etc. on inter-regional and inter-statal routes. In respect of these routes State Transport Authority shall perform all the duties hitherto being performed by the Regional Transport Authority; (2) All types of permits on inter-statal routes shall be countersigned by the State Transport Authority."

3. Relying principally on the above resolution the Regional Transport Authority. Jaipur, declined to consider the respondent s application, which it is admitted, was for an inter regional and inter-State route.

4. Aggrieved by the decision, the respondent filed the above Writ Petition challenging the validity of the above resolution of the State Transport Authority. The challenge was twofold. One was that under Chapter IV of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 dealing with the control of transport vehicles it was the Regional Transport Authority which could entertain such an application and not the State Transport Authority. It was true that under Section 44 (3) the State Transport Authority was entitled to perform the duties of the Regional Transport Authority under certain conditions but this was not a case answering those conditions: In the second place, it was contended that there was an agreement between the States of Rajasthan and Haryana about the grant of Inter-State Permits and in order to give effect to that agreement, the State Government had issued to the State Transport Authority on December 14, 1966 a direction under Section 43 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act to the effect that the Regional Transport Authority was to invite applications for stage carriage or public carrier Permits and that it had to select applications for the grant of permits keeping in view the conditions laid clown by the Inter-State Transport Commission in this behalf. The cases of these selected candidates were then to be referred to the Transport authorities of the other States concerned for granting the counter signature under the agreement. It was contended that the State Transport Authority was bound to obey this direction issued by the State Government under Section 43 (1) with regard to the grant of Inter-State permits and, therefore, the resolution of the State Transport Authority dated January 27. 1969 was illegal being contrary to the direction given by the State.

5. The contention of the respondent was upheld by the High Court on both these grounds and a direction was issued to the Regional Transport Authority to dispose of the application of the respondent for the grant of permit on Jaipur-Rohtak route in accordance with the law. It is from this Order