Petitioners in both these cases were holders of stage carriage permits operating on the route Panthanahalli to Bangalore. The permits granted to them were for a period of 5 years valid upto either 1-3-2005 or 31-1-2005. It is the case of the petitioners that immediately after the grant of permits, they had commenced the operation of the services. The aforesaid permits were challenged by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (for short, 'KSRTC') and some other private operators before the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal (for short, the 'Tribunal’) by filing revision petitions. The said revision petitions were allowed on 30-12-2000 and the orders of the State Transport Authority (for short, 'STA') were set aside and the permits granted in favour of the petitioners were cancelled mainly on the ground that the grant of permits on the route in question overlaps the notified route of Kolar Pocket Scheme, Anekal Scheme and APSRTC Scheme. The said order of the Tribunal was challenged by the petitioners before this Court in W.P. Nos. 2008-2011 of 2001 and other connected matters. This Court dismissed the said writ petitions by order dated 7 -2-200l. Writ appeals filed against the said order in W.A. Nos. 1946 to 1948 of 2001 were also dismissed by the Division Bench on 14-6-2001. Against these orders, Civil Appeal Nos. 322 to 325 of 2002 were filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court by Its order dated 14-1-2002 remitted the matter back to the learned Single Judge of this Court for reconsideration in the light of the decision in Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. Ashrafulla Khan and Others. Again the matter was heard by the learned Single Judge of this Court and the writ petitions were dismissed by the order dated 21-3-2002. Writ appeals filed against the said order in W.A. Nos. 2742 to 2746 of 2002 and other connected matters were dismissed on 30-5-2002.

2. Thereafter, the State Government has modified the Kolar pocket Scheme and a notification to that effect was issued on 7-11-2003. Petitioners once again filed applications for renewal of the permits before the STA and the STA by its order dated 5-1-2005 resolved to restore and renew the permits of the petitioners. An endorsement was issued to that effect on 13-1-2005. Permits were again issued to the petitioners. Those permits were challenged by the KSRTC and some other private operators before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by its order dated 4-2-2005 has set aside the said permits. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, petitioners have filed these writ petitions.

3. I have heard the learned Counsels for the parties.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would argue that as per the modification to the Kolar Approved Scheme dated 7-11-2003, the permits granted and issued by the STA to the petitioners are saved. Therefore, the Tribunal is not justified in allowing the revisions filed by the KSRTC and other private operators.

5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the KSRTC and other private operators submits that two conditions have to be satisfied for renewal of the permits granted between 10-1-1980 and 31-7-1999. The first condition is that the permits should have been granted and issued by the Transport Authority after the modification of the Kolar Pocket Scheme dated 10-1-1980 on Inter-State, Inter-District and Intra-Districts routes overlapping the road section of the notified routes lying in the scheme of Kolar as on 31-7-1999 and secondly on the date of draft notification i.e., on 27-5-2003, the said stage carriage permit holders should be exempted to operate their services. It is further argued that the Tribunal by its order dated 30-12-2000 in Revision Petition No. 432 of 1998 and other connected matters had set aside the order of the STA resolving to grant permits and the permits granted in favour of the petitioners were cancelled. The said orders were not stayed by this Court. The petitioners were permitted to op