S.K.MAL LODHA, J. - (1.) AS common question are involved in these appeals they were heard together and we consider it proper to dispose them of by a common judgment. Facts first.
(2.) D .B. Civil Special Appeals No. 470/1982 and D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 471/1982 - These two appeals are directed against the order dated May 3, 1982 of the learned single Judge, by which he allowed S.B. Civil Writ Petitions No. 46 of 1982 and 29 of 1982 filed by respondent No. 3. There is a route by Vallabhnagar to Bhadesar in Udaipur region. The scope on this route was three permits with two return services. There were two vacancies and as such applications were invited by the Regional Transport Authority, Udaipur ('RTA' hereinafter) for the grant of non -temporary permits. Respondent No. 3, who was petitioner in the writ petitions and the appellant Abdul Gaffar, who was non -petitioner No. 3 in Writ Petitions No. 29/82 and non -petitioner No. 3 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 46 of 1982, submitted the applications for grant of non -temporary permits on this route. The appellant, respondent No. A and 11 others submitted applications to the RTA. The RTA considered the applications at its meeting, which was held on December 11/12, 1980. The RTA decided to grant two non -temporary permits to (1) Ramlal and (2) Abdul Gaffar, appellant. The Resolution, which was passed by the RTA in regard to the grant of non temporary permit in favour of Abdul Gaffar, contained peremptory condition that he would put Vehicle No. RJR 6755 on the route within sixty days after presenting the tax clearance in respect of the vehicle and will also obtain clearance in relation to any departmental challan pending in respect of that vehicle, it was also mentioned in the Resolution that in the event of failure to comply with the conditions, the grant would stand automatically revoked. Abdul Gaffar, ('appellant) submitted an application before the RTA on February 7, 1981 seeking extension of one month's time for putting his vehicle No. RJR 6755 on the route. Before that application could be decided by the RTA, he submitted another application dated March 9, 1981, in which he stated that Vehicle No. RJR 6755 was being plied on Bhadsora -Nimbahera route under a non -temporary permit and that he has purchased another Vehicle No CPO 9089 which he wants to ply on the aforesaid route and that the permit may be issued in his favour for that route in respect of Vehicle No. CPO 9089. The Secretary, RTA, prepared a Circular Note dated March 24, 1981 proposing for grant of permit to Abdul Gaffar on Vehicle No. RRY 383 instead of Vehicle No. RJR 6755 and also for extension of time for obtaining the permit by one month and submitted it for approval. The RTA on that note pissed an order dated April 2, 1981 giving its approval to the aforesaid proposal. Respondent No. 3 Lalchand filed an appeal against the Resolution of the RTA dated December 11/12, 1980 granting permit in favour of Abdul Gaffar, before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the S.T.A.T.'). While the appeal was pending, the RTA passed the order dated April 2, 1981. Respondent No. 3 Lalchand has stated that he has brought the order dated April 2, 1981 which was passed by the RTA to the notice of the S.T.A.T. The S.T.A. V. dismissed the appeal by its order dated October 12, 1981. Respondent No. 3 Lalchand, filed another S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 29/80 questioning the legality of the order dated October 12, 1981 of the S.T.A.T. Respondent No. 3 filed another writ petition as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 46/82 challenging the order dated April 2, 1981 passed by the RTA in as much as he considered that the S.T.A.T. has not passed any express order regarding its validity The learned single Judge, by his order dated May 3, 1982, allowed both the writ petitions and set aside the order dated April 2, 1981, passed by the RTA and the permit issued in favour of Abdul Gaffar. He directed that the S.T.A.T. will decide the appeal of respondent No. 3 Lalchand proceeding on the basis that the grant of the permit made in favour of Abdul Gaffar under the Resolution of the RTA dated December 111/12, 1980 stood revoked on the expiry of sixty days provided in the said Resolution. Aggrieved, the appellant Abdul Gaffar has filed these two special appeals as aforesaid.
(3.) DB Civil Special Appeal No. 592 of 1982 : This appeal has been filed against the order dated March 1, 1982 of the learned single Judge by which the petition of the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution was dismissed. The RTA granted a non -temporary stage carriage permit and on June 13, 1979 on Rani -Bali -Desuri route. A condition was imposed that in case the permit was not available of within a period of sixty days on a vehicle of the prescribed model, the grant of the permit in favour of the petitioner shall stand revoked. As he failed to comply with the conditions, the grant of permit made in favour of the appellant automatically stood revoked on the expiry of sixty days, from the date of the grant. On August 16, 1979, the petitioner submitted an application for obtaining permit in respect of Vehicle No. RJZ 9261. This application was filed beyond the period of sixty days. No permit was granted to the appellant because the vehicle produced by him for obtaining the permit was not of the prescribed model. The appellant did not take any step for a period of one year. He, however, filed another application on September 23, 1980 before the Secretary, RTA, Jodhpur for condonation of delay and for issuing permit to the appellant on Vehicle No. RJY 4583 The RTA condoned the delay and compounded the matter on payment of Rs. 500/ - as fine within a period of thirty days and directed that the permit be issued to him. Against the order of the RTA, Ramlal, who was an existing operator on the route, lodged a revision before the S.T.A.T. The revision was allowed by order dated December 12, 1980 by the STAT on the ground that the grant of permit in favour of the appellant having been revoked on the expiry of sixty days from the date of the giant, the RTA had no jurisdiction to condone the delay and allow the petitioner to obtain permit at any point of time thereafter The appellant filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 308 of 1981 praying that the order dated October 12, 1980 of the S.T.A.T., setting aside the order dated September 26, 1980 of the RTA maybe quashed. The writ petition was contested. The learned single Judge, by his order dated March 1, 1982, dismissed the writ petition. The appellant has filed the special appeal.;