(1) This Writ Petition pertains to certain proceedings relating to the grant of stage carriage permit under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the M.V. Act).

The present 4th respondent applied for a stage carriage permit for plying his bus from Bangalore to via Kunigal via Tavarekere, Magadi and Kempanahalli, and back. As part of the route lay within Bangalore District and the remaining part in Tumkur District, it was an inter-regional route. It was on 14-6-1958 that the 4th respondent filed his application; the substance of that application was published in the Mysore Gazetted Dated 25-12-1958. On 13-2-1959, the application of the 4th respondent was considered by the Bangalore Regional Transport Authority and it was resolved that a permit be granted to the 4th respondent. The present petitioner was one of the objectors before the R.T.A. ; he was an operator on the route Bangalore to Kallur, a portion of which was common with the route for which the 4th respondent has sought the permission. He appealed to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the S.T.A.T.) against the resolution of the R.T.A. granting the permit to the 4th respondent. The appeal filed by him was dismissed by the S.T.A.T. The further appeal against decision of the S.T.A.T to the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the M.R.A.T.) by the present petitioner was unsuccessful and was dismissed on 3-1-1961. (The present petitioner as well as another objector had both preferred appeals to the S.T.A.T, and then to the M.R.A.T.; it was by common judge those appeals). Thereafter, the present writ petition has been filed. Sri M.R. Venkatanarasimhachar has appeared for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Shamsundar for the 4th respondent and Government Pleader Sri T. Radha Krishna for the first respondent (The Mysore Revenue Appellant Tribunal).

(2) The petitioner, in seeking to obtain a writ of certiorari quashing the proceedings which took place before the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal and the Authorities constituted under the Motor Vehicles Act, has urged three grounds: The first one is that the substance of the 4th respondent's application for the stage carriage permit had not been published under Section 57(3) of the M.V. Act and that the route for which the permit was granted to the 4th respondent was not in accordance with what had been published under Section 57(3). The second ground of attack is that the Regional Transport Authority, Tumkur, has not followed the relevant rules in counter-signing the permit and that, therefore, the permit granted to the 4th respondent was of no legal validity in so far as it related to that portion of the route which lay within the jurisdiction of the Tumkur Regional Transport Authority. The last point which has been urged on behalf of the petitioner is that as the R.T.A., Bangalore did not consist, at the relevant time of non-official member, the Constitution of this R.T.A.. was not in accordance with Section 44 (2) of the M.V. Act and that, therefore the permit issued in favour of the 4th respondent, is liable to be quashed.

As against these contentions, it has been argued by Sri Shamsunder for the 4th respondent that none of these grounds has been urged either before the S.T.A.T. or the M.R.A.T. and that the petitioner should not be permitted to urge them now for the first time, in these proceedings. Government Pleader (Sri Radhakrishna) has refuted the allegation of the petitioner that the Regional Transport Authority had not been constituted in accordance with the requirements of Section 44(2) of the M.V. Act. After hearing the arguments of the learned Counsel, we are satisfied, for the reasons stated below, that this writ petition cannot succeed.

(3) So far as the first contention is concerned, it is not disputed before us that the petitioner had not urged before by of the Authorities under the Act that the substance of the petitioner's