1. The petitioner in O.P. No. 1477 of 1960 is the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 8 of 1961 and the petitioner in O.P. No. 1476 of 1960 is the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 9 of 1961. The two petitions were dismissed by Vaidialingam, J., by a common judgment dated the 4th January 1961.

2. In Para.1 to 22 of the judgment the learned judge considered every aspect of the case presented before him and held:

"The appellate tribunal has come to the conclusion that one permit each has to be granted to applicants Nos. 4 and 13. I am not satisfied that there is any error in law or any illegality committed by the appellate tribunal when it differed from the conclusion arrived at by the R.T.A. and granted permits in favour of applicants Nos. 4 and 13 and therefore, in my view, the applications will have to fail."

We entertain no doubt that O.P.Nos.1476 and 1477 of 1960 were rightly dismissed, and we consider it unnecessary to cover afresh the grounds covered in Para.1 to 22.

3. The contention which induced the reference to a Full Bench is the contention dealt with in Para.23 to 25 of the judgment under appeal. That contention was to the effect that if a permit was granted by a Regional Tr