SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Cal) 606

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.
Sri Avijhit Ghosh And Others - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal And Others - Respondent
WPA No. 10886 of 2022 With WPA 10896 of 2022
Decided On : 29-06-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr.Arabinda Chatterjee, Mrs. Kakali Dutta, Mr. Arkadipta Sengupta, Mr. Subhajit Das, for the Appellant; Mr. Pantu Deb Roy, Mr. Subrata Guha Biswas, Mr. Amal Kumar Sen, Mr. Lal Mohan Basu, Mr. Bhaskar Nandi, Mr. B. K. Samanta, for the Respondent

The main legal point established in the judgment is that allegations of fraud must be supported by evidence and specific allegations, and administrative decisions must be based on valid evidence rather than conjecture and surmise.

Headnote:

Fraud - Regional Transport Authority Decision - Section 114(e) of Evidence Act, 1872, Amendment to Section 44 dated August, 2019

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners' bus permits were cancelled by the Regional Transport Authority (RTA) based on complaints that the buses were not fully prepared within the required time. The RTA's decision was based on conjecture and surmise, and it overstepped its jurisdiction by questioning the validity of the bus registration. The court found that the RTA's decision was not supported by evidence and was based on vague presumptions.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the RTA's decision was not supported by evidence and was based on vague presumptions. The court held that the RTA acted without authority and on the basis of conjecture and surmise, and therefore set aside the RTA's decision, reviving the petitioners' permits.

Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the RTA's decision to cancel the petitioners' bus permits based on allegations of fraud and the timing of bus preparation in relation to the registration.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that allegations of fraud cannot be accepted merely on the basis of conjecture and surmise, and that the RTA overstepped its jurisdiction by questioning the validity of the bus registration. The court also emphasized the importance of evidence and specific allegations in proving fraud.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions, setting aside the RTA's decision and reviving the petitioners' permits to ply their vehicles on the designated routes.

JUDGMENT

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. - The writ petition has been filed against an order dated June 7, 2022 passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata Region, thereby affirming the decision of the RTA Board Meeting dated June 27, 2018, whereby the permit of the petitioners to ply their buses on Routes - 30C and 30C/1 were cancelled.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows :

3. The petitioners' buses were registered on September 14, 2011. Upon being issued Offer Letters for plying their buses on the aforesaid routes, issued by the Motor Vehicles Authority on May 5, 2011 and May 11, 2011 respectively, the petitioners purchased the chassis of their buses and allegedly had the same developed as ready buses in a private garage. Ultimately, registration was granted in respect of the buses on September 14, 2011 and the petitioners started plying their buses on the aforesaid routes.

4. On October 11, 2017, the Secretary, RTA, Kolkata issued show-cause notices to the petitioners on the basis of certain complaints lodged by the private respondents. A similar notice was issued again on April 18, 2018. The petitioners duly attended the hearing fixed by the RTA, Kolkata on April 27, 2018.

5. On May 15, 2018, three complaints dated August 24, 2017, January 17, 2018 and March 9, 2018 were handed over to the petitioners. On May 15, 2018, a writ petition was filed by the private respondents, upon which a co-ordinate Bench of this Court directed the RTA, Kolkata to decide on the complaints lodged against the petitioners. The petitioners preferred appeals bearing MAT 496 of 2018 and MAT 497 of 2018 respectively against the said order, but the orders were substantially retained in appeal.

6. On June 27, 2018 pursuant to the said direction, the RTA cancelled the petitioners' permits.

7. The petitioners preferred writ petitions bearing WPA 18920 of 2018 and WPA 18922 of 2018 respectively against the said decision, upon which another co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated April 01, 2022, remanded the matter to the RTA, Kolkata Region with a direction to reconsider the case afresh, taking into account all relevant documents and the facts which would emerge from the documents. The RTA was given liberty to hear all necessary parties once again, including the petitioners and the private respondents and pass an order within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of the order.

8. Subsequently the RTA, vide order dated June 07, 2022, affirmed its decision dated June 27, 2018, against which the present writ petitions have been preferred.

9. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, certain documents, which are part of the records, deserve mention.

10. Proforma invoices were issued to the petitioners on May 25, 2011 by one Bhandari Automobiles Private Limited, indicating the costs of the chassis of each of the vehicles.

11. The petitioners have annexed receipts dated June 25, 2011 for payments made by the petitioners to Bhandari Automobiles, In the said receipts, it was mentioned 'Hypothecated to State Bank of India'.

12. Sale Certificates were issued for the bus chassis to the petitioners by the said Bhandari Automobiles on September 12, 2011.

13. The petitioners have produced receipts of Registration Fee dated September 13, 2011 and for payment of further Registration Certificate Fee dated September 13, 2011. In the said documents, the year of manufacture was mentioned as 8/2011'. The registration was granted in respect of the vehicles on January 14, 2011.

14. On September 14, 2011, the petitioners made request for route permit.

15. It is noted that the complaints, on which the permits of the petitioners were cancelled were to the effect that it was not possible for the petitioners to complete manufacturing of fully prepared buses within two days. The RTA proceeded on such premise, on the basis of the Sale Certificates being dated September 12, 2011 and the registration being granted on September 14, 2011.

16. From the Sale Cer

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top