ORDER

Heard on I.A. No.2388/2024, which is an application for vacating the stay granted by this Court on 29.02.2024.

2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents submits that instead of hearing the matter on application for vacating the stay, the matter may be heard finally, to which the counsel for the petitioner had not objected, hence with the consent of parties, I.A. No.2388/2024 is disposed of and the matter is heard finally.

3. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 02.02.2024 passed by the Secretary, State Transport Authority, Gwalior, whereby an application of the petitioner for grant of temporary permit for the route Khandwa to Jalna for the period 09.01.2024 to 30.04.2024 was rejected and the applications preferred by present respondents No. 3 and 4 were allowed contrary to the benefit of the public and law.

4. Short facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is a bus operator is resident of District Khandwa, had applied for temporary permit for the route Khandwa to Jalna, which is a route between the State of M.P. and State of Maharashtra notified under the reciprocal agreement between the two States.

The petitioner for the aforesaid route had offered bus bearing registration No.MP12-ZD-7001 having sitting capacity of 53 passengers and is model of 2013 registered on 08.01.2024 at District Khandwa. The route for which the temporary permit was sought was of the total distance of 214 K.M., which runs through the State of M.P. for 92 K.M. and 120 K.M. through the State of Maharashtra.

5. The present respondent no. 3 Jayesh Maheshwari also filed an application on 14.12.2023 for grant of permit on the same route for the same period and had offered a vehicle having registration no. MPO9-FA-9195, a model of 2018.

6. For the same route two more applications were filed by one Yogesh Chouksey, as there were two permits in the hands of State of MP. The said applications were moved on 28.12.2023 for grant of permit for the same period and the vehicle offered was having registration no. MP68-P0-206, which was model of 2015.

7. Since Yogesh Choksey had preferred two applications, in the light of Transport Policy of 2010 formulated by the State of M.P., one of his applications was rejected. In the said Transport Policy in clause 5.3 it had laid that on the bus routes there should not be monopoly of a single person or institution or a company and not more than 50% of the permits should be issued ordinarily to one party for the same route.

8. The Secretary to the State Transport Authority after hearing the remaining three applications for grant of temporary permit, rejected the application of the present petitioner holding that the petitioner is a resident of a place which is 16 KM. away from the place of one of the termini of the route, he is not having any experience and as he is distant relative of Yogesh Choksey, another applicant and, therefore, his application in the sequence of priority could not be accepted and the same was rejected and the other two applications filed by the present respondents No.3 and 4 were accepted on the grounds that they had long experience of transportation and the vehicles which they have offered are in accordance with the requirements and they are the residents of places of termini. Aggrieved by the said rejection of his application as well as allowing of the applications preferred by the respondents No. 3 and 4, the present petition came to be filed.

9. A reply has been filed in the matter on behalf of respondent No.3, wherein it has been submitted that the Secretary, State Transport Authority had granted/issued temporary permits in favour of the respondents No.3 and 4 for one single trip on Khandwa to Jalna (Interstate) route w.e.f. 07.02.2024 to 30.04.2024 while exercising powers under Section 87(1)(c) read with sec.88 of the Motor ‘Vehicles Act 1988, subject to countersignature by the reciprocal St