1. Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 24037 to 24039 of 2009 are stage carriage operators, operating their services on the strength of permits issued by the authority concerned. The 3rd respondent is also a stage carriage operator. 2nd respondent was granted stage carriage permit on 21-8-2006 on the route Hadli to Bangalore via Channapatna and Kamanagaram. 3rd respondent had filed R.P. No.630 of 2008 before the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Authority Tribunal, Bangalore (‘STAT’ for short) under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, challenging the permit granted to the 2nd respondent. On the basis of the memo dated 1-12-2008 filed by respondents 2 and 3, the Tribunal has passed the order dated 18-12-2008 allowing the petition, setting aside the impugned order therein dated 21-8-2006 and directing the 1st respondent/Secretary, RTA to assign the timings to the service of 2nd respondent in the revision petition as indicated in the order. Since the timings assigned by agreement of the parties in the said order affected the service of the petitioners, they preferred Misc. Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of 2009 before the Tribunal. The said petitions were entertained. However, by an order dated 22-07-2009, the miscellaneous petitions filed by the petitioners were dismissed as not maintainable. Aggrieved thereby, the aforesaid writ petitions have been filed.

2. Petitioner in W.P. No. 24040 of 2009 had questioned by filing Misc. No.4 of 2009 the order passed by STAT in R.P. No.629 of 2008, dated 18-12-2008. The said miscellaneous petition though was entertained and notices were issued to the parties, was subsequently dismissed as not maintainable by an order dated 22-7-2009.

3. Since the impugned orders in both these writ petitions are common and the parties are also common, these writ petitions are taken up for consideration together.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the contesting respondents submitted that, the order dated 18-12-2008 passed in R.P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008 as well as the common order dated 22-7-2009 passed in Misc. Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 of 2009 by the STAT may be set aside, since the grievance of the petitioners herein require consideration by the Tribunal in R. P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008. Learned Government Advocate did not object for the matters being delegated back to the STAT for reconsideration. The 1st respondent/secretary, RTA, cannot have any objection for the STAT to reconsider the said revision petitions on accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to these petitioners.

5. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Counsel, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i) Writ petitions are allowed;

(ii) The common order passed by the STAT, Bangalore in Misc. Nos. 1,2,3 and 4 of 2009, dated 22-7-2009 is hereby set aside. The said petitions stand allowed. The petitioners in the said miscellaneous petitions shall be added as additional respondents in R. P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008 by the STAT.

(iii) The order dated 18-12-2008 passed in R.P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008 shall stand set aside. The said revision petitions are restored to the file of STAT.

(IV) In order to avoid delay in the disposal of the matters by the STAT and to expedite the hearing in R.P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008 and that their clients will appear either in person or through learned Advocates and take further orders from the STAT. Parties have agreed to appear before STAT on 1-9-2009 to receive further orders. STAT is directed to take up on board R. P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008 and deal with the same in accordance with law. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the STAT on 31-8-2009 so as to enable the office of STAT to post the matters before the Tribunal for its consideration on 1-9-2009.

(v) All the contentions of both parties are left open for consideration by STAT.

(vi) STAT is directed to dispose of on merit, R. P. Nos. 629 and 630 of 2008 by taking the same on board on day-to-day ba