THIRUPATHI RAYUDU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(APH)-1955-10-25
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on October 03,1955

YARLAGADDA THIRUPATHI RAYUDU Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT (TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT) Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

RADHIKA DEVI VS. LALITA SARAN [LAWS(PAT)-1985-2-12] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Government in G. O. Rt. No. 53, Transport Department, Government of Andhra dated 27-11-1953. The stage carriage permit issued to the petitioner in respect of bus MDG 1737 was suspended for six months by the Regional Transport Authority, Guntur on the ground that there was an overloading of passengers. The order of the Regional Transport Authority, was confirmed by the Central Road Traffic Board, on appeal, and by the Government on a revision petition filed under Section 64-A. The petitioner has consequently filed the writ to quash the order of suspension.
(2.)The simple question raised by Srimathi Amareswari on behalf of the petitioner is, whether the orders passed by the Transport Authorities are not vitiated by the omission to refer to the statements given by respectable persons that the bus was not over loaded. In paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, it is stated that four respectable persons, (1) Sri Gorantla Ramaiah, District Board Member, Veerannapalam (2) Dodda Venkataswami, Ex-President Panchayat Board, Annabhatlavaripalem(3)S.Radhakrishnamurthi President, Annabhatlavaripalem Panchayat Board and (4) M. Venkatasubbaiah, Teacher, Parachoor, who travelled by the same bus on 30-5-1953 gave statements before the Regional Transport Authority that there was no overloading, It is surprising that there is no reference to their statements in the order passed by the Regional Transport Authority. The Regional Transport Authority which exercises judicial or quasi-judicial functions in suspending the permit should have taken into consideration the entire evidence and decided whether there was overloading. The Transport Authority erred in giving its judgment merely on the report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police.
(3.)It appears that the petitioner raised in the grounds of appeal to the Central Road Traffic Board that the Regional Transport Authority erred in not referring to and acting upon the statements given by the respectable persons that there was no overloading of the bus. From the file of papers produced by the Government Pleader, I find that the remarks of the Regional Transport Authority were called for by the Central Road Traffic Board and that the following remarks were made in paragraph 4:
"The appellant brought some persons to the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority and the Regional Transport Authority was not convinced by the oral statements' given by them."

;


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