A.K.Sinha, J. - (1.) In this Rule the petitioner prays for quashing certain orders made by the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 cancelling the petitioner's permanent stage carriage permit. Briefly the facts are as follows: The petitioner was granted a permanent stage carriage permit in respect of Bus No. WBR 396 on Route No. 84 granted by the respondent No. 3. By a show cause notice dated 19-9-1903 the petitioner was asked to submit his explanation against the proposed order of cancellation of his said permit on the ground that the said bus was being operated upon by another person named Tarapada Saha. The petitioner submitted his explanation but the respondent No. 3 not being satisfied cancelled the petitioner's permit under Section 60(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) Against this order the petitioner preferred an appeal to the State Transport Authority. The appeal was heard and dismissed by the Appellate Sub-Committee, the respondent No. 3 by its order dated 27-7-64. That is how the petitioner felt aggrieved and obtained the present Rule.
(3.) Upon these facts several grounds were taken but Mr. Moitra on behalf of the petitioner contended in the first place that there was no transfer of vehicle or the permit by the petitioner and, therefore, the order of cancellation on the ground of such transfer was bad in law. In the second place, he contended that even assuming that there was such transfer, the Regional Transport Authority or the Appellate Authority had no power or jurisdiction to cancel such permit as restriction on transfer was not a condition on breach of which the permit was liable to be cancelled.;