JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra, J. - These companion appeals raise common questions and can be conveniently decided by a common judgment.

2. The dispute relates to Saharanpur-Muzaffarnagar via Deoband route. This route lay within the jurisdiction of the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut.

3. On 23rd March, 1959, the Meerut Authority raised the strength of this route from 16 to 25. On June 13, 1959, the Authority invited applications from Motor Operators for the grant of permits for the nine new vacancies. As many as 1095 applications were filed by a large number of persons, including the respondents. The applications were published in the Gazette of 2nd January, 1960, for inviting objections. During the pendency of these proceedings, the Meerut Authority granted some permits to displaced operators.

4. On 8th September, 1961, the State Government issued a Notification under Section 44 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. It created Regional Transport Authority at Dehra Dun. The districts of Dehra Dun and Saharanpur which till then lay within the jurisdiction of the Meerut Authority, were attached to the Dehra Dun Authority. The Saharanpur-Muzaffarnagar via Deoband route lay within the jurisdiction of Meerut as well as Dehra Dun Authority; but major portion of the route fell within the jurisdiction of the Dehra Dun Authority.

5. On 4th April, 1963, the Regional Transport Authority, Dehra Dun resolved to increase the strength of this route from 32 to 40. Thereafter the Dehra Dun Authority granted two permits to displaced Operators on this route.

6. Mohammad Rihan was an operator plying on the Saharanpur-Muzaffarnagar Via Deoband route. His permit was about to expire. He made an application for renewal. A number of other persons also similarly applied for grant of permits. All these applications were published by the Dehra Dun Authority and after consideration of the objections, at its meeting held on 26/27th July, 1963, it resolved to renew the permit of Mohammad Rihan. The other applications were postponed for consideration to a future meeting. At the meeting held on 18 to 20 February, 1964, Dehra Dun Authority renewed the permit of one Mohammad Irshad. Five other applications for grant of permits that had been instituted before the Dehra Dun Authority, were postponed for consideration on a future date. Against these orders renewing the permits of Mohammad Rihan, Mohammad Irshad and postponing consideration of other application, seven appeals were filed before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. By its order dated 10th August, 1964, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals in part. It did not cancel the renewal of the two permits; but it remanded the matter to the Regional Transport Authority, Dehra Dun directing it to consider the remaining seven applications in relation to the vacancies still existing. It appears that by that time 1095 applications that had been initially filed before the Meerut Authority were transferred by it to the Dehra Dun Authority. The Appellate Tribunal in its order held that -

"the large number of applications which had been filed before the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, had become infructuous R. T. A., Dehra Dun." It directed the Dehra Dun Authority to fill up the remaining vacancies after considering the aplications which were filed before it alone.

7. Principally aggrieved at the direction to exclude the consideration of 1095 applications the respondents filed three writ petitions in this Court.

8. A learned single Judge held that since the Regional Transport Authority, Dehra Dun had merely postponed consideration of the applications, those applicants had no right of appeal. The appeals filed before the Appellate Tribunal were not competent. In relation to the observations made by the Tribunal relating to the 1095 applications filed initially at Meerut, the learned Single Judge held that those applications were rightly transferred to the Dehra Dun Authority and that the Dehra Dun Authority had in