Subba Rao, J. - (1.) These appeals on certificates are directed against the judgement of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, dismissing the petitions filed by the appellants under Art. 226 of the Constitution for issuing writs of certiorari to quash the orders of the Government of Andhra Pradesh confirming a scheme of nationalisation of transport and the subsequent orders of the Regional Transport Authority cancelling the appellants' stage carriage permits.
(2.) These appeals are the off-shoot of the judgement of this Court in Gullapalli Nagesara Rao vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, AIR 1959 SC 308 delivered on November 5, 1958. The facts were fully stated therein. It would be only necessary to recapitulate briefly the facts relevant to the present enquiry:The appellants were carrying on motor transport business for several years in Krishna District in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Shri Guru Pershad, styled as the General Manager of the State Transport Undertaking of the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport, published a scheme for nationalisation of motor transport in the said State from the date to be notified by the State Government. Objections to the said proposed scheme were invited by the State Government, and the appellants, among others, filed their objections. On December 26, 1957, the Secretary in charge of the Transport Department gave a personal hearing to the objectors and heard the representations made on behalf of the State Transport Undertaking. The entire material gathered by him was placed before the Chief Minister of the State in charge of transport, who made the order approving the scheme. The approved scheme was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated January 9, 1958, and it was directed to come into force with effect from January 10, 1958. Thereafter the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporations, which was formed under the provisions of the Road\Transport Corporation Act, 1950, took over the Undertaking and proceeded to implement the scheme under a phased programme. The appellants moved this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution for quashing the said scheme on various grounds. This Court rejected most of the objections raised by the appellants except in regard to two pertaining to the hearing given by the Secretary in charge of the Transport Department which resulted in the quashing of the order of the Government approving the scheme and directing it to forbear from taking over any of the routes on which the appellants were engaged in transport business. After the said order notices were issued by the Government to all the objectors informing them that a personal hearing would be given by the Chief Minister on December 9, 1958, and they were further informed that they were at liberty to file further objections before November 30, 1958. The Chief Minister heard the representatives of the objectors and the Corporation and passed orders dated December 19, 1958, rejecting the objections filed and approving the scheme as originally published. The order approving the scheme was duly published by the Government in the official Gazette on December 22, 1958. On December 23, 1958, the Corporation applied to the Road Transport Authority for the issue of permits for plying stage carriages and for eliminating the permits granted to the private bus operators. On December 24, 1958, the said Authority passed orders rendering the permits of the appellants ineffective from December 24, 1958, and also issuing permits to the Corporation in respect of the routes previously operated by the appellants. The said orders were communicated to the appellants on December 24, 1958, and they were also directed to stop plying their buses from December 25, 1958, on their respective routes. The appellants, who were aggrieved by the orders of the Government as well as by the order of the Regional Transport Authority filed petitions in the High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution for quashing the same.
(3.) The petitions were heard by a Division Bench of the said High Court consisting of Chandra Reddy C.J. and Srinivasachari J., who negatives the contentions raised by the appellants and dismissed the petitions. Hence these appeals.;