The Regional Transport Authority cannot grant a temporary permit mechanically or as a matter of course but only on fulfilment of conditions laid down in Section 87 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

SAMARESH BANERJEE, J.

( 1 ) IN each of the 4 writ petitions, which have been heard analogously, the writ petitioner has challenged an order passed by the Regional Transport Authority rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of temporary permit.

( 2 ) EACH of the writ petitioners applied for grant of temporary Stage Carriage Permit in route No. 12 / C / 1 / 2 before the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta region. As the said application was not being disposed of, each of the petitioners moved this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution whereupon Shri Rang Mishra, J. was pleased to dispose the writ application by directing the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta, to consider the question of grant of temporary permit for Stage Carriage to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of 8 weeks from the communication of the order. Such application was thereafter considered by the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta, considered and the petitioner was communicated with an order rejecting the application of the petitioner on the ground that no purpose/ reason has been mentioned in the application for which a temporary permit can be granted.

( 3 ) IT is the contention of the petitioner that the self same authority has granted temporary permit to Shri Gopal Seth and to Shri Kuldeep Dhawan, where as the same is being arbitrarily refused to the petitioner thereby making a hostile discrimination against the petitioner. It is the further case of the petitioner that the impugned order passed by the respondents is not a speaking order and the same is absolutely vague and in view of the liberal policy introduced under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for grant of permit to those who entered into Motor Transport business such permit should have been granted to the petitioner.

( 4 ) MR. Murari Mohan Das, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner in support of the writ application has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mithilesh Garg v. Union of India, reported in AIR 1992 SC 443 : (1992 AIR SCW 41) and has contended inter alia that it will appear from the said decision that the Supreme Court while interpreting the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has held that because of the liberal policy introduced by the State, the grant of permit will be the rule and therefore the respondents could not have refused permit. It has been further contended by Mr. Das that in the case of the aforesaid Mr. Gopal Seth and Kuldeep Dhawan to whom temporary permit have been granted by the respondents, such permit have been granted to them even though no purpose or reason for obtaining temporary permit was indicated in the application.

( 5 ) THE defence of the respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition inter alia is to the effect that temporary permit under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 cannot be granted mechanically or as a matter of course but only on fulfilment of conditions laid down in Sec. 87 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It has been further contended that Rule 123 (2) of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules provides that an application for Stage Carriage is to be made in the prescribed manner and it will appear from the prescribed form that the purpose of temporary permit is required to be indicated admittedly which was not done in the instant case and therefore the application of the petitioner was rightly rejected.

( 6 ) THE respondents have also denied the allegation of making any discrimination in respect of the writ petitioner. It has been contended that temporary permit was granted to Shri Gopal Seth after due consideration of his application and after ascertaining the present need of Transport and also in compliance with the order of the Hon'ble Court for consideration of the matter sympathetically. Mr. Kuldeep Dhawan was granted temporary permit from 10th January, 1995 to 8th May, 1995 on consideration of the purpose in respect thereof. It has been further cont

Click Here to Read the rest of this document