( 1 ) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing 29 temporary permits granted to the Raipur Transport company (Private) Limited, Raipur (respondent No. 3) by the Regional Transport authority, Raipur (respondent No. 1) in exercise of powers under Section 62 (c) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Annexure 'a' is the list of the 29 routes for which the temporary permits have been granted.

( 2 ) OUT of the said routes, some are partially affected by Scheme No. 13 and others by Scheme No. 23 notified under Chapter IV-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. Scheme no. 31 has also been brought into operation as a result of which all the 29 routes are completely covered. The three schemes are under challenge in writ petitions filed by the third respondent. In Scheme Nos. 13 and 23 this Court refused to stay the operation of the schemes, but passed conditional orders. They are reproduced below:

"scheme No. 13: the Regional Transport Authority, Raipur/bilaspur are restrained from taking any action under Section 68-F (2) of the act in Regard to the permit or permits held by the petitioner till the disposal of this petition. If any application for renewal of permit has been or is filed by the petitioner the same shall remain pending till the disposal of this application. If any application for grant of temporary permit is filed by the petitioner while their renewal applications are pending, the regional Transport Authority shall consider the same notwithstanding the pendency of the application or the commencement of the impugned Scheme Respondent, the M. P. State Road Transport Corporation shall be at liberty to apply for stage carriage permits under Section 68-F (1) of the Act. But during the pendency of this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the Corporation's services on the routes covered by the impugned Scheme on the basis of the permits that may be granted under Section 68-F shall start and run to a timing half an hour later than the timings on which the petitioners are operating their services on those routes. "

Scheme No. 23:". . . . . the Regional Transport Authority, Raipur is restrained from taking any action under Section 68-F (2) of the Act in regard to the permit or permits held by the petitioner till the disposal of this petition. If any application for the renewal of the permit has been or is filed by the petitioner, the same shall remain pending till the disposal of the writ petition. If any application for the grant of temporary permit is filed by the petitioner while its renewal application is pending, the Regional transport Authority shall consider the same notwithstanding the pendency of the writ petition or the commencement of the impugned Scheme. As the petitioner is enabled to file applications for grant of temporary permits by operation of this order, Clause (d) of Section 62, read with the second proviso, may not come into operation. The Regional Transport Authority may, therefore consider the applications under Clause (c) of the said section. Respondent No. 4, the M. P. State Road transport Corporation shall be at liberty to apply for the stage carriage permits under Section 68-F (1) of the Act. But during the pendency of the application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the Corporation's services on the routes covered by the impugned Scheme on the basis of the permits that may be granted under Section 68-F shall start and run to a timing half an hour later than the timing on which the petitioner is operating its services on those routes. "

( 3 ) DURING the pendency of the writ petition before this Court the permits held by the third respondent on the said routes had expired and the third respondent had filed applications for renewal of the same. These applications could not be disposed of and were kept pending in pursuance of the orders, referred to above. The third respondent was, however, granted temporary permits f