- (1.) THESE writ petitions have been filed against the judgment and Order dated 1. 6. 1995 passed by Sri S. P. Agarwal, Chairman, of the State transport Appellate Tribunal, U. P. , Lucknow in Appeals No. 73, 74, 75 and 76 of 1994, Smt. Pratima Kumari Gupta, Smt. Manorama Devi shukla, Smt. Ramzana Begum and Om Prakash Jain v. Regional transport Authority, Kanpur, whereby while deciding the aforesaid appeals together by a common judgment and Order passed therein learned Tribunal has dismissed the aforesaid appeals. The aforesaid appeals were preferred against the Order dated 11,2. 1994 passed by the Regional Transfer Authority, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as r. T. A.), thereby the application for grant of regular stage carriage permit of petitioners on Phaphund-Ghatiaghat route (hereinafter referred as route) has been rejected.
(2.) THE facts and question in controversy involved in all the three writ petitions are identical ; therefore, the same are decided together by a common judgment. The Writ Petition No. 24588 of 1995, Smt. Ramzano Begum would be leading case and for the purpose of disposal of aforesaid writ petitions the facts of the same may be taken into account by the Court in deciding of the three writ petitions. The judgment and order passed in leading writ petition may be placed on record of connected writ petitions.
(3.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioners of the above writ petitions have applied for grant of regular stage carriage permit on phaphund-Ghatiaghat route before the R. T. A. Kanpur. The R. T. A. , kanpur, did not consider the application for grant of permit, therefore, five persons namely ; Smt. Rama Devi Upadhyay, Smt. Ramzano begum, Smt. Pratima Kumari Gupta, Om Prakash Jain and Smt. Manorama Devi Shukla (including three petitioners) referred above have filed Writ Petition bearing No. Ml of 1993 before this Court for a writ of mandamus with a prayer to direct the R. T. A. to consider the application of aforesaid petitioners for grant of permit. The writ petition was disposed of finally vide Order dated 6. 12. 1993 with a direction to the R. T. A. to consider the application of the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. It is alleged that the certified copy of the Order passed by this Court was filed before the R. T. A. on 15. 12. 1993 but r. T. A. did not consider the matter for a long time. Therefore, one operator moved an application on 1. 2. 1994 requesting the R. T. A. to consider his matter within two months from 15. 12. 1993 and also requested to intimate the date of consideration by registered post, but the R. T. A. , Kanpur without intimating the petitioners rejected all the applications on 11. 2. 1994. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Order of R. T. A. , kanpur, petitioners have filed aforesaid appeals before the State transport Appellate Tribunal, which were dismissed by a common judgment and Order passed by Tribunal on 1. 6. 1995 holding that the route of the petitioners Phaphund-Ghatiaghat has one termini common to another route Vishnugarh-Chhibramau-Farrukhabad-Ghatiaghat, for which an interim Order maintaining status quo passed by this Court in a Writ Petition No. 25544 of 1990 dated 9. 10. 1990 is still operating, therefore, no question arises for grant of any regular stage carriage permit to the petitioner on the route in question. Accordingly the tribunal has dismissed the appeals filed by the petitioners, hence feeling aggrieved against which the petitioners have filed aforesaid writ petitions.;