JAGAT NARAYAN, C.J.—These two writ petitions have been referred by a Learned Single Judge because he was of the opinion that the decision of another learned Single Judge in Harishchander Singh vs. Regional Transport Authority (1) requires reconsideration.

2. The relevant facts are these. The petitioner is one out of 17 existing operators on the Bikaner-Dungargarh-Sardarshahar route. Formerly there was no road between Dungargarh and Ratangarh. A new road was later on constructed and applications were filed by different persons for grant of permits over Bikaner-Dungargarh-Ratangarh route and over Bikaner-Dungargarh-Ratangarh-Churu route. These applications were published in the Gazette from time to time, and a meeting of the Regional Transport Authority was convened on 25-6-69 to consider them. Neither the petitioner nor any other person filed any objection against the grant of permits on these routes to the applicants in accordance with the provisions of sec. 57(3). On the date of hearing the petitioner appeared before the Regional Transport Authority and filed an application that it could not grant any permit on the Bikaner-Churu route as it had not fixed the limit of permits as req

Click Here to Read the rest of this document