RABINDRA NATH MOHANTY Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
RABINDRA NATH MOHANTY
STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
S.K.Ray, C.J. -
(1.) All these three applications have been heard analogously as they involve identical questions of law. Opposite parties 1 and 2 in each of these writ applications are respectively State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Orissa, and State Transport Authority. The petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure-2, which is the impugned proceeding of opposite party No. 2 dated 22-2-1975 by which their applications for grant of endorsement under Rule 3 (1) of the Orissa Tourist Vehicles Rules, 1967 (hereinafter called the 'Rules') have been rejected. The consequential intimation of this order of rejection to the petitioners which is Annexure-3, and the judgment and order of opposite party No. 1 dated 15-4-76 by which M.V. Appeal No. 15 of 1975 preferred by the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 381 of 1976, M.V. Appeal No. 16 of 1975 preferred by the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 382 of 1976 and M.V. Appeal No. 17 of 1975 preferred by the petitioner in O. J. C. No. 881 of 1976, which were analogously heard, have been dismissed. This order of opposite party No. 1 is Annexure-4 in O.J.C. Nos. 381 and 382 of 1976 and is Annexure-6 in O. J C. No. 881 of 1976.
(2.) By Annexure 1 dated 24-6-1974 opposite party No. 2 invited applications for endorsement on permit of motor cab or omnibus authorising it to ply as an All- India Tourist vehicle. This notice set out different numbers of vacancies available to be filled up in respect of three classes of vehicles. There were 91 vacancies in respect of tourist motor cab, 11 vacancies in respect of tourist omnibus with passenger capacity not exceeding 29 and 2 vacancies in respect of tourist omnibus with passenger capacity exceeding 29. Such applications were to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Rules framed by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 68 of the Motor Vehicles Act IV of 1939 (hereinafter called the 'Act'). The Rules provided that the State Transport Authority (opposite party No. 2) could grant an endorsement on the contract carriage permits granted under Section 51 of the Act in the State in relation to any motor cab or omnibus to the effect that such vehicles to which the permits relate are 'All India Tourist Vehicles.'
(3.) In response to Annexure-1, the petitioners along with 57 other persons filed two sets of applications each, one set was for grant of contract carriage permit in the State of Orissa and another set of applications for endorsement on such permits envisaged under Rule 3 (1) of the Rules. All these applications were processed under Section 50 of the Act in course of which three representations were received. The S. T. A. in its 105th meeting dated 22-2-1975, decided to grant permits for all India Tourist Omnibus with passenger capacity not exceeding 29 to eleven applicants, one from each of the district of Balasore, Bolangir, Dhenkanal, Ganjam, Kalahandi and Puri, three from the district of Cuttack and two from the district of Mayurbhanj, and rejected the applications of the petitioners in O.J.C. Nos. 382 and 881 of 1976. Those grantees (except one Pradip Kumar Nath whose name was expunged from records of the appeals before the Tribunal) have been impleaded as opposite parties 3 to 12 in O.J.C Nos. 382 and 881 of 1976. The S.T.A. in that very meeting also decided to grant permits for All India Tourist Omnibus with seating capacity more than 29 in favour of two persons by rejecting the claim of the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 381 of 1976. These grantees have been impleaded as opposite parties 3 and 4 in O.J.C. No. 381 of 1976.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.