A.N. Grover, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the constitution which was referred by me sitting singly to a Bench in view -of the importance of the points raised.
(2.) IT has been alleged in the petition that the Haryana Roadways is holding route permits as follows: - - (a) One permit for plying a bus from Dadri to Narnaul, (b) One permit for plying a bus from Dadri to Mohinder - - (c) Two permits for plying buses from Mohindergam to Narnaul, and (d) One permit for plying a bus from Kanina to Narnaul (via Mohindergarh). These routes cover parts of the route from Rohtak to Narhaul The Regional Transport Authority, Patiala, issued temporary permit to the Punjab Roadways, Gurgaon for one more return trip daily on Rohtak -Narnaul via Dadri route in the following terms: On 50:50 basis between the Punjab Roadways, Gurgaon and the Private Operators who were having one permit with one return trip daily each. The grant of the temporary permit has been challenged on the ground that it could not have granted by the Regional Transport Authority except on the grounds enumerated in Section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act), which are as follows: (a) for the conveyance of passengers on special occasions such as to and from fairs and religious gatherings, or (b) for the purposes of a seasonal business, or (c) to meet a particular temporary need, or (d) pending decision on an application for the renewal of a permit, or (e) in such circumstances as may, in the opinion or such authority, justify the grant of such permits. It may be mentioned that the last clause has been added by the Motor Vehicles (East Punjab Amendment) Act, 1948. It has further been alleged that by another resolution dated 24th June 1963 the temporary permit has been -re -issued in favour of the Punjab Roadways, Gurgaon for a further period of three months, the basis being the same -as before. According to the Petitioner, a temporary permit could have been issued for a period of four months only and it could not be reissued for a further period not exceeding four months as that would be contrary to the provisions contained in Section 62 of the Act.
(3.) IT is necessary to set out the reply of Respondent Mo. 1 to paragraphs 5 and 6 in extenso: 5 and 6. It is not conceded that a temporary permit could not legally be given to the Punjab Roadways, Gurgaon on the 50:50 basis. The Implementation Committee, as intimated by Provincial Transport controller Vide his memo. No. H114/CA -1/C dated 4 -1 -63 (annexure -B), decided to grant the following trips on Rohtak Narnaul via Dadri route. Pepsu Road Transport 4 trips. Corporation 1 trip Punjab Roadways, Gurgaon 1 trip Private Operators 1 The Punjab operators were allotted equal share in the nationalized and private sector. The share of the erstwhile Pepsu State equal to 4 trips in terms of the mileage was allotted to Pepsu Road Transport corporation in view of complete nationalization in the erstwhile Pepsu State Pepsu Road Transport corporation by mutual agreement had its 4 trips transferred to punjab Roadways, Gurgaon. This additional trip sanctioned by the Regional Transport Authority in January, 1963 the aforesaid orders of 22 -1 -1963 was in lieu of one or the trips transferred from the Pepsu Road Transport corporation. As already mentioned above, the temporary permit was issued under Section 82 (d) of the Motor vehicles Act amended by (East Punjab) Amendment Act, 1948. If and when regular permit (s) under 50:50 scheme is issued, the prescribed procedure will be followed under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The order OR the Regional Transport Authority is, therefore, regular, proper and in the public interest.;