T.N. Singh, J.

1. At two levels, same question of jurisdiction arises for decision in this case. The question is, what is the ambit of jurisdiction of a State Transport Appellate Tribunal, for short, STAT (herein, respondent No. 1) under section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for short, the Act, and whether the impugned order passed by the said respondent is liable to be quashed by writ of certiorari. The question also is whether, sitting at this Bench, we possess the requisite jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against respondent No. 2, Regional Transport Authority, Hoshangabad Division, Bhopal.

2. First, few facts which are short and simple. The petitioner firm is engaged in transport business at Itarsi in the district of Hoshangabad of this State. As per . Annexures P/1, P/2, P/3, P/4, he filed on 30-12-1989 four separate applications for operating vehicles on four different routes within the jurisdiction of respondent No. 2. On those routes, he has averred, on temporary permits, vehicles of different operators have been allowed to run for the last four years. Because applications of the petitioner for non-temporary permits were kept pending, operation on the route