SARJOO PROSAD, C.J.—These two petitions are directed against the order of the State Transport Authority dated 29th May, 1961. The petitioners pray that the said order of the said Transport Authority should be quashed by a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ.

2. Petitioners Messrs. Ujagarsingh & sons in one case, and the petitioner Poonamchand in the other, held non-temporary stage carriage permits on the Deoli-Kotah route. As the permits were to expire on 29th February, 1960, the petitioners applied to the Regional Transport Authority for renewal of those permits in the month of November 1959. For various reasons, to which it is unnecessary for us to refer at this stage, the Regional Transport Authority could not dispose of those applications. The petitioners approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of mandamus and this Court, in D.B. Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 155 and 157 of 1661, directed, by its order, dated nth May, 1961, that the Regional Transport Authority should consider the claim for renewal of the permits of these petitioners and dispose of their applications for renewal within a fortnight from the date of the order. It is relevant to mention at this stage that during the pendency of these applications, schemes for nationalisation of road transport both for the Ajmer-Kotah route and the Jaipur-Kotah route were framed and published. The scheme with reference to the Ajmer-Kotah route was published on 15th December, 1960 while that in respect of the Jaipur Kotah route was published on 15th February, 1961. Objections to these schemes were raised by certain operators and they were over-ruled. The matter, therefore, came up before this Court for consideration under Article 226 of the Constitution whether the schemes in question were valid schemes; and by an order, dated 3rd May, 1961, this Court held that the Jaipur-Kotah scheme could not be upheld and the objections raised in respect of that scheme had to be reconsidered by the person authorised to hear them and dispose of the objections before approving the scheme. This Court, however, rejected the objections in regard to the Ajmer-Kotah scheme and upheld the same. It was only after the above order of the Court dated 3rd May, 1961 was passed that the Court later disposed of those writ petitions and gave the direction as aforesaid on nth May, 1961 as respect the applications for renewal of permits by these petitioners. It appears that on account of the transfer of the Divisional Commissioner, who was the Chairman of the Regional Transport Authority, Kotah, the Regional Transport Authority was not functioning and therefore the State Transport Authority dealt with the matter of renewal of the permits of these petitioners, and by its order, which is now impugned before us, rejected the applications for renewal. The petitioners have moved that the order in question should be quashed and have raised two grounds in support of their prayer.

3. Firstly, it is contended that the State Transport Authority had no jurisdiction what soever to deal with the question of the renewal of these permits and the only authority which was authorised to hear the matter was the Regional Transport Authority. In fact the Court by its order, dated 11th May, 1961, had also directed the Regional Transport Authority, Kotah to dispose of these applications within a fortnight from the date of the order. Secondly, the order is assailed on the ground that the State Transport Authority was in error in rejecting the applications for renewal of these permits, simply because the route on which these petitioners operate, i. e. Deoli-Kotah route, was covered by the scheme for nationalisation of the Ajmer-Kotah route. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the scheme with reference to the Ajmer-Kotah route made no reference what soever to this route of the petitioners, viz. Deoli-Kotah route, nor in the description of the permit-holders whose permit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document