The court emphasized the necessity of balancing public safety with the provision of transport services, ruling against arbitrary rejections of permit applications.

JUDGMENT :

(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN.,J)

These Writ Appeals are directed against the order of this Court made in W.P(MD)No.19413 of 2014,W.P(MD)No.19737 of 2016 and W.P(MD)No.20130 of 2014,dated 29.08.20216 and for consequential relief as stated supra.

2. Originally the Writ Petitioners/appellants filed applications before the third respondent for grant of mini bus permits to ply on the route of Theni Housing Board Colony to RMTC Nagar. It was rejected by the third respondent. Challenging the same, the appellant filed an appeal before the second respondent herein. The second respondent set aside the order of the third respondent and directed him to give permit to the appellant and challenging the same, the first respondent filed W.P(MD)No.19413 of 2014, third respondent filed Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.20130 of 2014 and the fourth respondent filed Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.19737 of 2016. Since all the Writ Petitions arising out of the same order passed by the second respondent, all the Writ Petitions are heard together and a common order dated 29.8.2016 is passed allowing the Writ Petitions and set aside the order passed by the second respondent. Challenging the same, now the appellant has filed the present three Writ Appeals.

3. All the Writ Appeals have been heard together and a common judgment passed by this Court.

4. The case of the appellant is that the appellant approached the Regional Transport Authority, the third respondent herein for grant of two mini bus permits from Theni Housing Board Colony to RMTC Colony. Subsequently, he filed application for modification of the route and the same was allowed by the second respondent. Against the order of the second respondent, neither the transport authorities nor the objectors/private respondents preferred any revision before this Court. Subsequently, the third respondent rejected the application of the appellant on different grounds and therefore, he filed an appeal before the second respondent. The second respondent considered all the facts and set aside the order of the third respondent and directed to give permit to the appellant on the modified area and also under the New Comprehensive Scheme introduced in the year 2011. Challenging the same, respondents 1,3 and 4 have filed Writ Petitions. The Writ Court, set aside the order of the second respondent and also allowed the Writ Petitions and therefore, the appellant is before this Court.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the third respondent rejected the application filed by the appellant for grant of mini bus permit five times successfully on some other grounds after the remand order passed by the second respondent every time. Firstly, on 29.10.2003, the there respondent rejected the mini bus permit on the ground of narrow saturation and narrowness of the route. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed an appeal in Appeal No.1212 of 2003 before the second respondent and the same was allowed by the second respondent by order, dated 19.08.2005. and directed the third respondent to grant mini bus permit subject to the availability of vacancy earmarked, difficulty expressed by the authorities and on seniority. The said order of remand was not challenged by anybody and the same become final. The third respondent has not complied with the order of the first respondent and hence the appellant filed Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.10252 of 2005 to implement the order of the second respondent and consequent to the remand order, the third respondent rejected the application of the appellant based upon the judgment of this Court made in W.A(MD)Nos.135 and 136 of 2006, dated 2.8.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed a statutory appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, the second respondent herein in Appeal No.174 of 2009. In the said appeal, appellant filed an application for modification of the route so as to get over the judgment of this Court in the above said Writ Appeals and to bring t