DAVE, J.—These are 3 writ applications under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of temporary permits granted by the Regional Transport Authority Jaipur by its resolutions Nos. 222 and 223 dated the 25th June, 1960. Although the temporary permits have been granted on different routes to different persons, common questions of law are involved in these applications and therefore they are disposed of together.

2. In order to appreciate the points canvassed before us, it would be proper to state briefly the facts which have given rise to these applications : —

Writ applications Nos. 216 and 217 are in respect of the permits granted for Jaipur Kishangarh route. The petitioners in writ application No. 216 are bus operators holding non-temporary permits and they are plying their buses on Jaipur-Kishangarh-Ajmer route. The Jaipur Kishangarh route overlaps Jaipur Ajmer route upto Kishangarh. These petitioners were granted permits by the Regional Transport Authority Jaipur by resolution No. 380 of 1958 on 16-12-1958. There were several appeals against that resolution and so the Appellate Authority set-aside the said resolution on 7-12-1959. The petitioners filed writ applications Nos. 27 and 59 of 1960 and it was urged by them that the Appellate authority had decided the matter against them without giving them any notice of appeal and a chance of hearing. Learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellate authority gave an undertaking that the appellate authority would give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and therefore they withdrew their writ applications. The appeals filed against them were therefore still pending when the present application was filed. The petitioners were allowed to ply their buses during the pendency of the appeals against them and therefore their buses are running on the Jaipur Ajmer route.

3. Non-petitioners Nos. 3 to 22 had non-temporary permits to ply buses from Jaipur to Kishangarh and the period of their permits expired on 30.9.59. Before that date, they had applied for renewal of their permits. Tho:e renewal applications could not be decided early and therefore they were given temporary permits for 4 months from 30.9.1959 to 30.1.1960. On 1.2.1960, the Regional Transport Authority gave them Certificates for plying their buses. On 26th,27th Feb., 1960, their applications for renewal of permits were rejected by resolution No. 49 by the Regional Transport Authority on the ground that the State Transport Undertaking was likely to run its buses in the near future. But since the Regional Transport Authority was not certain about the date from which the State Roadways buses were to run on that route, the non-petitioners were granted temporary permits for 4 months subject to the condition that they would become ineffective from the date the Rajasthan State Roadways buses would begin to operate on that route. Aggrieved by the said resolution, the non-petitioners filed a writ application No. 134 of 1960 which was decided on 26.5.1960. It was heard by a learned Judge and he has found that the Rajasthan Transport Authority had not given an opportunity of hearing to the non-petitioners before rejecting their applications for renewal of permits. The resolution No. 49 therefore was set-aside and the Regional Transport Authority was directed to reconsider their applications after giving them an opportunity of hearing in connection with the scheme relating to the nationalisation of the Transport services by the State. Thereafter the non-petitioners presented fresh applications for temporary permits. Before considering these applications, the non-petitioners were permitted to ply their buses on what was called "temporary authorisation". These applications were allowed on 25.6.60 by resolution No. 223 for a period of 3 months or till the disposal of their applications for renewal which ever was earlier. It is the validity of this resolution which is challenged by the petitione

Click Here to Read the rest of this document