HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.17752 OF 2021 (MV)

C/W WRIT PETITION NO.24468 OF 2021 (MV)

IN W.P. NO.17752/2021 BETWEEN:

SMT. R. PUSHPA W/O LATE P.R. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, PROP: SRI HANUMAN MOTOR SERVICE, SIRA MAIN ROAD, SIRA – 572 137.

TUMAKURU (DIST).

…PETITIONER (BY SRI C.M.S. SHARIFF, ADVOCATE AND SRI SHAILENDRA B.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH 1. THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, COURT OF T.T.M.C. COMPLEX, ‘A’ BLOCK, KARNATAKA K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027.

2. THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027 BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI M. RAO, HCGP FOR R-1;

SRI HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

HC-KAR THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.228/2018 DATED 10.08.2021 AS PER ANNEXURE-D.

IN W.P. NO.24468/2021 BETWEEN:

SMT. P.R. NAGASUDHA W/O MALLI SURESH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PROP: HANUMAN MOTOR SERVICE, SIRA-572 137, TUMAKURU (DIST.)

...PETITIONER (BY SRI C.M.S. SHARIFF, ADVOCATE AND SRI SHAILENDRA B.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, T.T.M.C. COMPLEX, ‘A’ BLOCK, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027.

BY SECRETARY.

2. THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027 BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI M. RAO, HCGP FOR R-1;

SRI HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.229/2018 DATED 10.08.2021 AS PER ANNEXURE-D.

HC-KAR THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The short question that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is:

“Whether, while considering the variation of a stage carriage permit under Section 80 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (“MV Act”, for short), the distance of variation has to be calculated by adding both onward and return journeys?”

2. The petitioners in these writ petitions are aggrieved by the common order dated 10.08.2021 passed by the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal (“Tribunal” for short) in Appeal Nos.228/2018 and 229/2018, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeals filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (“Corporation” for short) and set aside the orders dated 08.02.2018 passed by the Karnataka State Transport HC-KAR Authority (“Authority” for short) granting variation of the petitioner's stage carriage permits.

Brief facts:

3. The petitioner in W.P.No.17752/2021 is the holder of Stage Carriage Permit No.77/93-94, and the petitioner in W.P.No.24468/2021 is the holder of Stage Carriage Permit No.29/92-93, both operating on the route Pavagada-Sira and back. The petitioners submitted application dated 25.04.2017 seeking variation of their existing permits by way of curtailment of a portion of the route and deviation/extension of the route in the middle sector along with the revision of timings under the provisions of the MV Act. The Authority, after obtaining joint route survey report dated 24.05.2017 and after hearing the parties, considered the applications in its meeting held on 20.01.2018 and granted variations sought by the petitioners by order dated 08.02.2018, holding that the variation was within the permissible limit prescribed under the statute and that the route was non-monopoly.

HC-KAR

4. Aggrieved by the said orders, the Corporation preferred Appeal Nos.228/2018 and 229/2018 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by its common order dated 10.08.2021 allowed the appeals and set aside the variation granted by the State Tr