JANTA TRANSPORT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITYJAIPUR
LAWS(RAJ)-1960-11-9
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on November 05,1960

JANTA TRANSPORT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, JAIPUR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

HEYDON'S CASE [REFERRED TO]
GWYNNE V. BUMELL [REFERRED TO]
FORD V. KETTLE [REFERRED TO]
KIRK V. TODD [REFERRED TO]
CRAWFORD V. SPOONER [REFERRED TO]
WHITELEY V. CHAPPELL [REFERRED TO]
SALOMON V. SALOMON AND CO. [REFERRED TO]
COX V. HAKES [REFERRED TO]
GRUNDT V. GREAT BOULDER PROPRIETARY GOLD MINES [REFERRED TO]
MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR BOARD V. HENDERSON BROS. [REFERRED TO]
PART CARGO EX-STEAM SHIP 'ANTILA' [REFERRED TO]
SUTTERS V. BRIGGS [REFERRED TO]
SRI RAMA VILAS SERVICE LTD. V. THE ROAD TRAFFIC BOARD,MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
CHANDI PROSAD V. R. T. A. GAUHATI [REFERRED TO]
AMARAVATHI MOTOR TRANSPORT CO.,AMARAVATHI V. STATE OF ANDHRA [REFERRED TO]
CALICUT WYNAD MOTOR SERVICE (PRIVATE) LTD. V. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TRICHUR [REFERRED TO]
MADHAB CHANDRA DAS V. REGIONAL TRANSPORT,AUTHORITY,GAUHATI REGION [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. AJAIB SINGH [REFERRED TO]
JUGALKISHORO SARAF VS. RAW COTTON COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL JABAR BUTT VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [REFERRED TO]
Y V SRINIVASAMURTHY VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
MOTI LAL VS. GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
KOTAH TRANSPORT LTD VS. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
KHANDARI BABU VS. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY UDAIPUR REGION UDAIPUR AND [REFERRED TO]
KISHEN LAL L R OF MOHANLAL VS. SOHANLAL [REFERRED TO]
JAIRAM DAS V. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR [REFERRED TO]
JAIRAMDAS VS. REGIONAL TRANSPORT [REFERRED TO]
BHANWARLAL VS. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL OF THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY AND [REFERRED TO]
HARI NARAIN ROY VS. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
EMPEROR VS. BENOARI LAL SARMA [REFERRED TO]
PAKALA NARAYANA SWAMI VS. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

B HSHANKAR SINGH VS. PABDUL AZEEZ [LAWS(KAR)-1964-1-13] [REFERRED TO]
JOSEPH VS. RTA KOTTAYAM [LAWS(KER)-1964-2-2] [REFERRED TO]
GANPAT SINGH VS. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY JODHPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-1963-11-8] [REFERRED TO]
JAI KISHAN VS. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY JODHPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-1967-12-1] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV BUS SERVICE VS. R T A JODHPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-1980-1-4] [REFERRED TO]
SHART CHAND VS. NATIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY [LAWS(RAJ)-1985-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
C R GOWDA VS. MYSORE REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(KAR)-1964-2-5] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Dave, J. - (1.)These are 3 writ applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of temporary permits granted by the Regional Transport Authority Jaipur by its resolutions Nos. 222 and 223 dated the 25th June, 1960. Although the temporary permits have been granted on different routes to different persons, common questions of law are involved! in these applications and therefore they are disposed of together.
(2.)In order to appreciate the points canvassed before us, it would be proper to state briefly the foots which have given rise to these applications:
(3.)Writ Applications Nos. 216 and 217 are in respect of the permits granted for Jaipur Kishangarh route. The petitioners in writ application No. 216 are bus operators holding non-temporary permits and they are plying their buses on Jaipur Kishangarh Ajmer route. The Jaipur Kishangarh route overlaps Jaipur Ajmer route upto Kishangarh. These petitioners were granted permits by the Regional Transport Authority Jaipur by resolution No. 380 of 1958 on 16-121958. There were several appeals against that resolution and so the Appellate Authority set aside the said resolution on 7-12-1959. The petitioners filed writ applications Nos. 27 and 50 of 1960 and it was urged by them that the Appellate authority had decided the matter against them without giving them any notice of appeal and a chance of hearing. Learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellate authority gave an undertaking not the appellate authority would give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and therefore they withdrew their writ applications. The appeals filed against them were therefore still pending when the present application was filed. The petitioners were allowed to ply their buses during the pendency as the appeals against them and therefore their buses are running on the Jaipur Ajmer route.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.