HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, and is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 6-12-1966 whereby on a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by the respondents the learned Judge ordered the cancellation of a permit granted to the appellant Aman Khan by the Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner, on the Churu-Jhunjhunu route which was an inter-regional route falling in Bikaner and Jaipur regions The relevant facts may briefly be recounted for appreciating the questions canvassed before us:
(2.) CHURU-JHUNJHUNU is an inter-regional route which is 30 miles in length. It is 6 miles in the Bikaner region and 24 miles in Jaipur region. Aman Khan applied for a permit over this inter regional route before the Regional Transport Authority, bikaner. The application was published in accordance with Section 57 of the Motor vehicles Act, 1939 hereafter to be referred as the "act", for inviting objections in the gazette dated 14-6-63. As no objections were received, the Regional Transport authority by its resolution dated 12-10-63 ordered that permit be granted to Aman khan over this route subject to the condition that he shall put a vehicle of the model prescribed by the State Transport Authority for the time being and it further ordered that vehicle be put within a period of 45 days, failing which the grant was to be treated as automatically cancelled. Aman Khan, however, found himself unable to put the vehicle of the requisite model and, therefore, a day before the expiry of the period of 45 days he filed an application on 26-11-63 to the Regional transport Authority, Bikaner, for extension of the time by another 15 days. According to the appellant, the Regional Transport Authority extended the time at its meeting held on 8-2-64, but he did not receive any intimation and, therefore, he could not comply with the order of the Regional Transport Authority. Eventually the minutes of the Regional Transport Authority's meeting held on 8-2-64 came to be received in the office of the Regional Transport Authority on 19-5-65 and on 24-5-65 the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner, Issued him the permit. Aman Khan got this permit countersigned by the Regional Transport authority, Jaipur on 28-5-65. In between it appears that the appellant was informed by some one in the office of the Regional Transport Authority that the regional Transport Authority had declined to grant the extension of time for putting the bus. He, therefore, lodged an appeal before the Transport Appellate tribunal thinking that the order for the grant of the permit had been revoked. When this appeal came up before the Transport Appellate Authority for hearing aman Khan himself produced a letter No 2411 dated 24-12-64 from the Secretary regional Transport Authority. Bikaner addressed to him to the effect that the matter regarding the extension of time was put up to the Regional Transport authority in its meeting dated 8/9th February, 1964, as item No 8 of the supplementary agenda, but the minutes of that meeting had not so far been finalised. From this letter the Transport Appellate Tribunal concluded that the regional Transport Authority had not taken any decision regarding the extension of time. In these circumstances the appeal was considered to be premature and consequently it was dismissed The Transport Appellate Tribunal, however, observed that the Regional Transport Authority should have taken a decision immediately and should not have taken so much time
(3.) BY the writ petition the respondents questioned the validity of the resolution of the Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner, granting permit to the appellant on the ground that the Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner, had absolutely no jurisdiction to entertain the application or to grant any permit in pursuance thereof as, according to Section 45 of the Act the application could have been filed only before the Regional Transport Authority, Jaipur in whose jurisdiction the major portion of the interregional route lay. It was also urged that the resolution of the regional Transport Authority granting permit was peremptory and in the event of the appellant not putting the bus within the period of 45 days allowed to him the grant stood revoked automatically. It was consequently urged that the Regional transport Authority, Bikaner could not have granted any time to the appellant for putting the bus, once the period of 45 days granted to him in the resolution itself had expired;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.