- (1.) This is a petition which has been filed by Garhwal Resins Ltd. under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the orders of the Regional Transport Authority dated the 23rd, 24th and 25th of August, 1954 and of the State Transport Authority dated 17-6-1955. It is further prayed that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut to consider the Petitioner's application for the renewal of its permits in accordance with law.
(2.) The Petitioner is a private limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act with its registered office at Rishikesh, district Dehra Dun. Briefly the facts set out in the affidavit filed in support of the petition are that one Natha. Singh Kashyap entered into a contract of lease with the Tehri-Garhwal State under which he took on lease certain forests in the Uttar Kashi Forest Division and Yamuna-To is Forest Division for the purpose of extracting resin. The leases were executed in the end of 1918 for five years and ten years respectively. The present applicant company was incorporated in the year 1949. Natha Singh Kashyap became one of its directors and the contract was transferred to the company. In order to carry out the contract two temporary permits for public carriers for plying on the route Muni-ki-Reti to Tehri were granted to the Petitioner company by the Tehri-Garhwal State. On 1-8-1949 the Tehri-Garhwal State merged into the Dominion of India and thereafter the Motor Vehicles Act became applicable to the territory of Tehri-Garhwal and the Petitioner company then applied to the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, for four permanent permits for public carriers. On 15-11-1950 the Conservator of Forests also addressed a letter to the Regional Transport Authority suggesting that the Petitioner company should be granted two public earner permits in the Yamuna-Tons Division and two in the Uttar Kashi Division, without any condition of restricting their use to the transport of forest produce only. In the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, held on 3-4-1951 it was decided that the Petitioner company should be granted four permits valid for three years Under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The resolution passed at the meeting runs as follows: On down journey they will bring forest produce and on up journey can carry public goods.
(3.) The Forest Department had pointed out to the Regional Transport Authority that on up journey the vehicles will have to go empty which will mean a loss to the contractor. It was therefore in the interest of the public that they should be allowed permits without any restriction. In pursuance of the resolution of the Transport Authority necessary permits were issued to the Petitioner which were valid for three years and were to expire on 4-1-1954. The permits were for plying public carriers on the Rishikesh-Tehri Dha-ram route. Sometime before the expiry of those permits, as required under the Motor Vehicles Act, the Petitioner applied for renewal of its permits. On 27-5-1954 the Petitioner company received a letter from the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, that as the resin contract had expired the Petitioner was to show cause why the said permit should not be renewed. The Petitioner made a reply to this letter on 30-6-1954 contending that there was no such restriction placed on the permits granted earlier to it. By a letter dated 28-9-1954 the Petitioner company was informed by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, that the authority by a resolution rejected the Petitioner's application for renewal of its permits. A copy of the resolution was forwarded along with this letter to the applicant Company. Thereafter the Petitioner went up in appeal to the State Transport Authority, Lucknow, against this order of the Regional Transport Authority which was rejected on 17-6-1955 and the appellate authority held that as the permits were given on the recommendation of the Forest Department and as the purpose for which the permits were granted had come to an end the renewal was rightly refused by the Transport Authority.;