Compliance with Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act is necessary for the grant of permits, requiring consideration of objections from associations or persons already providing road transport facilities along or near the proposed route.

1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

2. The Petitioner is an association which owns stage carriage houses. It holds two permits to run bus services between Seoni and Gondia, The Respondent No. 1 is the owner of the stage carriage buses and holds some permits to run bus services along that route. On 21-6-1948 Respondent 1 applied for a permit to run a bus service from Waraseoni to Gondia. His application was granted on 19-11-1949 despite objection by the Petitioner. The Petitioner thereupon preferred an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal but its appeal was dismissed. While dismissing the appeal, the Appellate Tribunal observed that if there was any further scope for the grant of a permit on the aforesaid route the Petitioner should be given a chance as it was a 'dislodged operator'.

3. On 14-4-1949 Respondent 1 made another application for a permit and this time for plying buses between Lalburrah & Waraseoni. The Petitioner objected to the grant of permit to Respondent 1. The Regional Transport Authority after hearing both the sides rejected the application of Respondent 1 on the ground that nationalization of the particular route was imminent and that it would not serve any purpose by granting a permit to him. The Respondent ho. 1 preferred an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. His appeal was allowed and a permit was granted to him. It would appear that though the Petitioner was made a party to the appeal and was present at the hearing the objection to the grant of a permit to Respondent 1 was not considered. According to the Petitioner, it was necessary for the Appellate Authority to consider its objection. It also states that on 17-6-1950 it had applied for a permit to run buses between Lalburrah and Gondia and that this application had also to be considered by the Appellate Authority before granting a permit to Respondent 1.

4. In our opinion it was not necessary for the Regional Transport Authority or the Appellate Authority to consider the Petitioner's application for the grant of a permit to run buses between Lalburrah and Gondia because that was not a matter in which Respondent 1 was interested nor was it a matter with which his application for the grant of permit was in any way concerned. Of course, it was open to the Appellate Authority to consider that application alongside the application of Respondent 1, if it thought it fit so to do. But that would be a different matter.

5. The other contention of the Petitioner that its objection to the grant of permit to Respondent 1 should have been considered by the Appellate Authority is, in our opinion, a good one. Where an Appellate Authority sets aside an order of a Regional Transport Authority and decides to grant a permit, then just as the Regional Transport Authority is bound to comply with the provisions of Section 47, Motor Vehicles Act, the Appellate Authority is also, similarly, bound to comply with those provisions. Under that section, it is necessary for the authority granting a permit to take into consideration, among other matters, any representation made by an association or a person already providing road transport facilities along ?or near the proposed route. The Petitioner is such an association and its objection ought to have been considered by the Appellate Authority.

6. Shri Sheorey who appears for the Appellate Authority states that it is only the Regional Transport Authority which is bound to comply with the provisions of Section 47 and not the Appellate Authority & that the only provision which the Appellate Authority was required to comply with is Rule 73 framed under the Motor Vehicles Act. In our opinion, that is not correct. Rule 73 lays down merely the procedure to be followed by the Appellate Authority, but the law to be complied with in the matter of grant of permit is that laid down in Section 47 and allied sections. Therefore, just as the Regional Transport Authority was bound to comply with the provisions of that secti