S. B. Sinha, J. - (1.) Leave granted in both the SLPs. Both the appeals are being disposed of through this common judgment.
(2.) Interpretation of a judgment of this Court, vis-a-vis the action taken by the first respondent pursuant to or in furtherance thereof is in question in these appeals. In the appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.2359 of 2006, the challenge is against a judgment and order dated 9.9.2005 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in LPA No. 1958 of 2005 whereby and whereunder a judgment and order dated 10.8.2004 passed by a learned single Judge of the said Court in Civil Writ Petition No.8339 of 2002 was upheld. The appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.2408 of 2006 is against the order and judgment dated 9.9.2005 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in LPA No. 1956 of 2005 confirming an order dated 17.8.2004 passed by a learned single Judge in WP (C) No. 13688 of 2004.
(3.) Since the facts in both the appeals are identical and since the same legal questions arise in both the appeals, reference is being made to the facts in the appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.2359 of 2006. Appellant is a Corporation constituted and registered under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1951, indisputably, for the purpose of plying of buses on various routes falling within the State of Uttar Pradesh and National Capital Territory of Delhi. Several agreements as envisaged under sub-section (5) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as the Act) were executed.;