Back
1977 Supreme(Del) 109
High Court Of Delhi
KANWALJIT SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI - Respondent
W.P. 937 of 1976
Decided On : 09/01/1977
A.K.SRIVASTAVA, V.P.NANDA, YOGESHVAR PRASAD
The STA cannot change the number of permits that have to be granted over a particular route when the application for stage carriage permit is actually under consideration.
Headnote:
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1939 - SECTION 47(3), 48, 57(7) - STAGE CARRIAGE PERMIT - GRANT OF - RESOLUTION PASSED BY STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY (STA) UNDER SECTION 47(3) REDUCING NUMBER OF PERMITS TO NIL - HELD, RESOLUTION ULTRA VIRES - STA DIRECTED TO RECONSIDER MATTER.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner applied for a Stage Carriage Permit on the route Delhi Fountain to Laxmi Nagar. STA fixed the strength of the number of Stage Carriage Permits to be granted over this route as two and invited applications. Several applicants applied, including petitioner and M/s. Mohan and Co. STA granted one permit to M/s. Mohan and Co. and found all other applicants ineligible except petitioner and M/s. Mohan and Co. Petitioner and M/s. Mohan and Co. were called for a personal hearing. M/s. Mohan and Co. were found ineligible for the permit, leaving only petitioner as the sole candidate. STA rejected petitioner's application and decided to invite fresh applications for the grant of a permit. Petitioner appealed to the Tribunal under Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which accepted the appeal and remanded the case back to STA for deciding whether the petitioner should be granted the permit. STA passed a resolution under Section 47(3) of the Act, stating that in the wake of energy crisis it will not be in the national interest to use Mini Bus where full bus can operate as per capita consumption of diesel in Mini bus was several times higher than that in a full. They were also of the opinion that in Delhi the use of Mini buses may be encouraged only from Delhi Junction New Delhi Railway Station and I.S.B.T. to different places in the city as full buses are not allowed to enter Railway Yards and I.S.B.T. Petitioner appealed to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, which declined to interfere with the impugned resolution of the Authority.
Finding of the Court:
The resolution passed by STA under Section 47(3) of the Act, reducing the number of permits to nil, is ultra vires. The STA is debarred from varying the order passed under Section 47(3) of the Act earlier in this case. Two mini bus permits have to be granted over this route. STA can only now determine whether there is any reason for rejecting the petitioner's application on any other ground. If there is no other ground, the permit must be granted.
Issues: Whether the resolution passed by STA under Section 47(3) of the Act, reducing the number of permits to nil, is valid?
Ratio Decidendi: The STA cannot change the number of permits that have to be granted over a particular route when the application for stage carriage permit is actually under consideration. The STA must fix the number of permits to be granted over a particular route, and after that the applications should be decided in the light of that fixation. The resolution passed by STA under Section 47(3) of the Act, reducing the number of permits to nil, is ultra vires.
Final Decision: Petition allowed. STA directed to reconsider the matter. STA debarred from varying the order passed under Section 47(3) of the Act earlier in this case. Two mini bus permits have to be granted over this route. STA can only now determine whether there is any reason for rejecting the petitioner's application on any other ground. If there is no other ground, the permit must be granted. Pending the decision of the matter before the STA, a temporary permit must be granted to the petitioner as granted by the interlocutory order and that permit should be renewed till the matter is decided by the STA.
( 2 ) THE petitioner then appealed under S. 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, to the Tribunal; this appeal was accepted and the case was remanded back to the State Transport Authority for deciding whether the petitioner should be granted the permit. It is urged by the petitioner that the remand order was bad because the appeal should have been accepted and the permit granted to the petitioner. Against the order of remand, the petitioner has filed another Writ Petition (C. W. No. 419/75), which is still pending in this Court. Prima facie, there seems to be no explanation why the matter was remanded back to the S. T. A. because the matter could have been finally decided by the Appellate Authority which is fully competent under Section 64 of the Act to grant or reject the application in the same way as the S. T. A. For the sake of convenience, I reproduce the reasons for the remand as reproduced in the present petition:
"in this regard, I find that it would not be proper at the appellate stage to make such an order since the facts that there are no other applicants in the field except the appellant, for the grant of the permit in question, have not been placed before me from the side of the S. T. A. This Tribunal is not in a position to judge the merits or demerits of the case of ether applicants, if any, since no arguments have been advanced before me on this account. "it seems that the Appellate Authority failed to notice that the petitioner was the only remaining applicant and the question of considering any one else did not arise. Still, the fate of the case after the remand has been somewhat different and has raised more complications, which are the subject-matter of this petition.
( 3 ) AFTER the remand, the State Transport Authority passed a resolution on 16th July, 1974, which is Annexure b to this petition and instead of deciding whether the petitioner should be granted the permit, seems to have gone somewhat on a tangent by passing the following resolution:
"resolution No. 4 dated 16-7-1974. The members examined the Comparative economics of Mini Buses, vis a vis a full bus put up before the S. T. A. and were of the opinion that in the wake of energy crisis it will not be in the national interest to use Mini Bus where full bus can operate as per capita consumption of diesel in Mini bus was several times higher than that in a full. They were also of the opinion that in Delhi the use of Mini buses ma
