A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

The writ appeals arise from a common judgment dated 15.03.2018 of a learned single judge, allowing the writ petitions preferred by private stage carriage operators, seeking a consideration of their applications for variation/extension of their temporary route permits, on non-notified routes. The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation is the appellant in the appeals, and they impugn the aforesaid judgment on the ground that the directions contained therein militate against the express provisions of clause (4) of the Scheme dated 25.03.2017, framed under Section 99 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

2. When the writ appeals came up for admission before us, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents in the writ appeals that, writ petitions have been filed challenging the validity of clause (4) of the Scheme dated 25.03.2017, and as the pleadings in the said writ petitions were complete, the writ petitions were ripe for hearing. As a decision in the said writ petitions will have a bearing on the writ appeals as well, we called for the pending writ petitions on the aforesaid issue, and it is thus that the writ petitions and the writ appeals are before us now.

3. We shall first deal with the writ petitions, and for that purpose, W.P.(C) No. 11825 of 2017 is taken as the lead case. Consequently, the reference to facts and exhibits is from the said writ petition.

4. The writ petitioners are holders of regular permits to conduct stage carriage services on select routes that had been reserved for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation [KSRTC] under a Scheme for Nationalisation in terms of Section 99 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The said Scheme [Ext.P5] dated 14.7.2009 was one that was finalised pursuant to a round of litigation that was initiated against the finalisation of an earlier Draft Scheme dated 9.5.2007 [Ext.P2]. As per Ext.P5 Scheme, which was a Route Centric Scheme, regular permits that had been issued in the private sector prior to 9.5.2006, could be renewed only subject to the State Transport Undertaking [hereinafter referred to as the “STU”] not offering a substitute service in the vacancy that resulted. It was also clarified that regular permits issued after 9.5.2006, would not be renewed, and only temporary permits would be issued after expiry of the validity of the regular permits already issued. Clause (4) of Ext.P5 Scheme reads as follows :

4. Whether the services are to be operated by the State Transport Undertaking to the exclusion of other persons or otherwise :

Yes, the permits issued in the private sector on or before 9-5-2006 will be allowed to continue till the dates of expiry of the respective permits. Thereafter regular permits will be granted to them. When the State Transport Undertaking applies for introducing new services in the above routes, corresponding number of existing private stage carriage permits in the said routes whose permits expire first after filing application by the State Transport Undertaking shall not be renewed. As regards permits issued after 9-5-2006 temporary permits alone shall be issued afresh on expiry in these routes or any portion thereof till such time the State Transport Undertaking replaces with new services. The decision of the State Transport Undertaking to apply for permits to replace the existing Stage carriages as above shall be taken by the Chief Executive of the State Transport Undertaking.

5. Although Ext.P5 Scheme was also challenged through writ petitions, the said writ petitions were dismissed, and Ext.P5 Scheme attained finality. While so, a fresh Scheme [Ext.P7] was published on 16.7.2013. This Scheme was a Service Centric Scheme whereby, the right to operate all classes of services, other than ordinary