Judgment

DESAI, J. :- These three appeals are directed against the common judgment rendered by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in three writ petitions styled as C.J.C. No. 381, 182 and 881, all of 1976 (Reported in AIR 1979 Orissa 133) moved by the appellants in these appeals. A common question of law permeates these three appeals, and therefore, factual matrix will be extracted from C.A. No. 2499/78 filed by one Mr. Ashutosh Swain as representative of the facts necessary for disposal of these appeals.

2. State Transport Authority, Orissa issued an advertisement dated June 24, 1974 inviting applications in the prescribed form for endorsement in the permit of the motor cabs or omnibuses enabling the holders of the permit to ply the vehicle as a tourist vehicle with all India operation, In other words, applications were invited from the operators for all-India tourist permit. The last date for receiving the applications was July 13, 1974. In response to the advertisement number of intending operators including the appellants in these appeals submitted their applications for grant of all-India tourist permit to the concerned authority within time. The State Transport Authority processed these applications and disposed of the applications at its meeting held on Feb. 2, 1975. The appellants herein were granted all-India tourist permits for omnibuses with passenger capacity not exceeding 29. Some of the applicants who failed to obtain a permit filed three appeals being M. V. Appeals Nos. 15, 16 and 17, all of 1975 to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (Appellate Tribunal for short) under Sec. 64(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Act for short). The Appellate Tribunal dismissed all the appeals and confirmed the order made by the State Transport Authority granting all-India tourist permits to the appellants. Three writ petitions came to be filed by the unsuccessful applicants for permit questioning the correctness of the order granting the permit and dismissal of their appeals. A Division Bench of the High Court by a common judgment allowed all the three writ petitions quashing and setting aside the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal as well as the State Transport Authority. Consequently, these appellants surrendered their permits. hence these three appeals by special leave. During the pendency of these appeals, appellants were granted temporary all-India tourist permits in compliance with the interim orders made by this Court.

3. Mr. Shanti Bhushan, learned counsel who led on behalf of the appellants urged that the High Court erred in holding that only the holder of an existing contract carriage permit alone was eligible to make an application for endorsement of his existing permit enabling the permit holder to ply a tourist vehicle on all-India operation, and consequently quashing the all-India tourist permits granted to the appellants on the sole ground that the appellants did not have or hold existing contruct carriage permit. It was next contended that the High Court was further in error in holding that the applications made by the appellants were incomplete as some of the columns were found blank. It was further submitted that the High Court was in error in relying upon sub-rules (2), (3) and (4). of Rule 3 of the Orissa Tourist Vehicles Rules, 1967 (1967 Rules for short) because the concept of all-India tourist permit received for the first time a legal format on the introduction of subs. (7) in Sec. 63 of the Act by Amending Act 56 of 1969 which came into force on October 1, 1970.

4. The scheme of the Motor Vehicles Act forbids an owner of a transport vehicle to use or permit the use of a vehicle in any public place (whether or not such vehicle is actually carrying any passenger or goods) save in accordance with the conditions of a permit granted or countersigned by the authority therein mentioned authorising the use of the vehicle in the place and in the manner in which the vehicle is to be used. The expres