Denesan, J.

Two writ petitions raising a common question have been referred to the Full Bench for decision. A learned judge of this court (Thottathil Radhakrishnan, J.) while considering W.P.(C) 4828/05 felt the need for the resolution of the apparent conflict between two bench decisions on the point. Accordingly, the matter came up before the Division Bench. Learned Judges of the Division Bench ordered the cases to be referred for determination by the Full Bench. Reference order passed by the learned single Judge brings to focus the point for consideration succinctly and the same may be usefully extracted below:

“The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 by which regular permit has been granted to the 2nd respondent subject to settlement of timings. An order granting permit is a revisable order under section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. However, even for that, the petitioner has to succeed a test as to his standing, thereby his entitlement to challenge the grant of permit in favour of the 2nd respondent.

2. By the decision of the Apex Court in Mithilesh Garg v. Union of India (AIR 1992 SC 443) their lordships surveyed the 1988 Act in contradistinction with the relevant pr