Kanhaiya Singh, J.

1. These two applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution by two different persons arise out of the same order and hence have been heard analogously and will be governed by this judgment. Rameshwar Sinha, the petitioner of M. J. C. 53, and Lalji Prasad Kohli, the petitioner of M. J. C. 57, have both obtained a rule in the High Court calling upon the opposite party to show cause why a writ in the nature of certiorari should not be issued to call up and quash the order dated 29-12-58 of Sri S. M. Ozair Munimi, Minister of Transport, purporting to act under Sec. 64-A of the Motor Vehicles Act and also a writ in the nature of mandamus prohibiting the opposite party from interfering with the right of the petitioners to ply bus on the disputed route.

2. By an advertisement published in the Bihar Gazette dated 22-2-50 the North Bihar Regional Transport Authority (hereinafter referred to as the R. T. A.), which is opposite party 3, invited applications for a permanent stage carriage permit in respect of the route Chapra-Bheldi-Suthiar-Derni, and in pursuance of the same the two petitioners and Dwarka Nath Sharma (opposite party 4) along with others