U.P.S.R.T.C. Vs. CIVIL JUDGE, BUDAUN AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-1991-11-94
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on November 12,1991

U.P.S.R.T.C. Appellant
VERSUS
Civil Judge, Budaun And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.A.Sharma, J. - (1.) For Budaun-Farrukhabad via-Allahpur-Usawan Kalan-Mirzapur-Doshpur-Nagar-Rajapur-Amratpur-Rajaipur-Janpar Mor route (hereinafter referred to as the route) the Regional Transport Authority, Bareilly region, Bareilly has granted ten permanent stage carriage permits to the U.P. Stale Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation), with the direction that the Corporation will lift the permits by 15-1-1990, failing which the grant will lapse automatically. The Corporation deposited the permit fee Rs. 2500/- for lifting aforesaid permits with the Regional Transport Authority on 29-12-1989. Inspite of the deposit being made, the permits were not issued and could not be obtained by the Corporation on or before 19-1-1990. On 17-1-1990 suit No. 12 of 1990 was riled by the Petitioner In the court of Civil Judge, Budaun, for injunction against the grant of permits to the Corporation by the Regional Transport Authority, Bareilly, in respect of the route. In this suit the Corporation has not been impleaded as party. Learned Civil Judge by order dated 17-1-1990 issued an interim injunction directing the Regional Transport Authority to maintain status quo. The Corporation has, however, started plying buses on the route without obtaining permits The Petitioners who are existing operators on the route, have filed writ petition No. 2991 of 1990 for a writ of mandamus restraining the Corporation not to ply buses on the route without obtaining permits for the same. The Corporation has also filed writ petition no 6664 of 1990, challenging the aforesaid interim injunction dated 17-1-1990. A prayer for prohibiting further proceedings in the aforesaid civil suit, filed by the petitioners, has also been made.
(2.) Parties have exchanged counter and rejoinder-affidavits. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
(3.) Sri A.D. Saunders, learned Counsel for the Petitioners in writ petition No. 2991 of 1990, has argued that the Corporation cannot ply its buses on the route without obtaining permits. Sri S.K. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the Corporation has, on the other hand, argued tint the Corporation was granted permits on 22-12-1989 and had deposited fee for issuance of permits on 29-12-1990, even then the Regional Transport Authority has not issued permits. On this basis it is contended that the issuance of the permit being purely ministerial action the Corporation can ply its buses on the basis of grant of permits, after depositing the necessary permit-fee. He also argued that the suit was not maintainable in the Civil Court, which granted interim injunction for maintaining status quo, which is also without jurisdiction.;


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