Modi, J.—This is a writ application by Bhanwarlal under Art. 226 and 227 of the Constitution and arises under the following circumstances.

2. The petitioner was granted a temporary permit for plying a stage carriage on the Pokaran Phalsond route via Ujlan Bhaniyana by the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur, on the 25th September, 1957. Accordingly the petitioner put one bus on the route on the 19th November 1957. Opposite party No 3 Laxminarain Gandhi is the holder of one stage carriage permit on this very route. He opposed the grant of the temporary permit in question to the petitioner but the Regional Transport Authority overruled the objection and granted permit. It appears from the resolution of the Regional Transport Authority dated the 25th, 26th, and 27th Sept., 1957, that the said authority had been of the opinion that the Pokaran Phalsoond route and the Phalsoond-Shergarh route should be amalgamated into one, and permits may be granted for the extended route from Pokaran to Shergarh, and to that end it invited fresh applications for the extended route. It further appears that on this view, the Ragional Transport Authority rejected certain applications for the grant of additional permanent permits on the Pokaran Phalsoond route and also rejected the petitioners application for a temporary Permit. 1 his happened in May, 1957. It is admitted that the opposite party Laxmi Narain Gandhi went in appeal to the Appellate Tribunal of the State Transport Authority and was successful in securing a stay order in connection with the consideration of the application for the extended route. Thereupon the present petitioner again applied for a temporary permit to the Regional Transport Authority on the 21st July, 1957. On the 29th July, the opposite party Laxminarain and another person Kartaram Chowdhari also filed two applications for permanent permits on the Pokaran Phalsoond route. All these applications came up for consideration before the Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur on the 25th to 27th September, 1957, and it ordered that a temporary permit valid for four months be granted to the petitioner and another similar permit to one Hamir Singh, with whom we are rot concerned in the present application. The opposite party Laxmi Narain thereupon went in appeal to the Appellate Tribunal of the State Transport Authority. The tribunal by its order dated the 20th November, 1957 directed a stay of the operation of the resolution of the Regional Transport Authority No. 53 dated the 25th to 27th September, 1957, and it further directed that if any of the grantees had been issued a permit before the stay order was passed by the Appellate Authority, the grantee or grantees as the case may be, be stopped from plying their vehicles on the said route. The petitioner challenges the aforesaid order by this writ application.

3. The petitioners contention, briefly stated, is that the Appellate Tribunal had acted without jurisdiction, inasmuch as no appeal to that authority was competent against the grant of a temporary permit. It is also contended that the stay order passed by the Appellate Tribunal virtually amountee to the cancellation or suspension of the temporary permit and that no such cancellation or suspension could be ordered and in any case without hearing the petitioner.

4. This application is opposed by the Appellate Tribunal and Laxminarain Gandhi. Their contention is two fold. In the first place it is urged that the order passed by the Regional Transport Authority for the grant of a temporary permit to the petitioner was appealable under clause (f) of sec. 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act (No. IV) of 1939. In the second place, it is also contended that the grant of a temporary permit to tee petitioner by the Regional Transport Authority in the present case was violative of the proviso to sec. 62 (as amended) inasmuch as applications for new permanent permits in connection with Pokaran Phalsoond route were pending before the Regional T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document