- (1.) These two identical writ petitions are proposed to be decided together vide this common order as both the writ petitions are based on identical set of facts and raise common questions of law and fact. However, for the facility of reference, facts are being culled out from CWP No.4482 of 2014.
(2.) The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.10.2013 (Annexure P-5), whereby appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, and also the order dated 19.5.1999 (Annexure P-4) passed by the State Transport Commissioner, Punjab, whereby all the applications invited for granting two regular stage carriage permits on the route in question, were declined for want of prior survey of the route.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities have misdirected themselves, while passing the impugned orders Annexure P-4 as well as Annexure P-5. He further submits that once the applications were invited by the competent authority for grant of two regular stage carriage permits, respondent No.1 had no authority to refuse to grant the permits in question in favour of any eligible applicant. In the present case, applications were invited vide Annexure P-8. Claiming himself to be an eligible applicant, petitioner applied for the regular stage carriage permit for the route in question. There were more than 50 competing applicants. However, respondent No.1 proceeded on a patently illegal approach, while passing the impugned order (Annexure P-4), rejecting the applications of all the applicants only for the reason that the route in question has not been surveyed and in the absence of such survey, it was not feasible to determine the immaculate kilometers falling on different roads. He further submits that once the competent authority has invited applications, it has to be presumed that survey on the route in question had already been conducted. Challenging the impugned appellate order, he submits that since the above-said factual aspect of the matter was completely misread and misunderstood by the learned tribunal, the impugned order was patently illegal. Finally, he prays for setting aside the impugned orders, by allowing the present writ petition.;