- (1.) In this group of writ petitions under Art.226 of the Constitution the petitioners have challenged the competence of the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority to publish under S.57(3), the applications submitted by the various applicants in pursuance of the notification issued under S.57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). All the writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgement as the question raised is common to all. The routes involved are different, but the facts, except the dates of various notifications, are more or less similar and, therefore, it is not necessary to set out here the facts of each individual matter. It would be sufficient if I state the facts of one writ petition, namely, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1537/86, M/s. Jamindara Motor Transport Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Superintendent, Government Central Press and Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner Region, Bikaner. The route involved in this petition is Ganganagar-Abhore inter-regional route. There was a scope of three permits and six return services. Three permits had been granted and were in operation. By the resolution dated the 19th Aug. 1985, the Regional Transport Authority, Bikaner revised the scope and fixed it at 10 permits and 20 return services. On Oct. 10, 1985, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority issued a notification inviting applications for the stage carriage permits to fill the vacancies so created. Thereafter, the applications so received were published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated the 13th Feb. 1986 by a notification issued on Dec. 26, 1986 by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority under S.57(3) of the Act. In this notification the date before which the representations were to be submitted and the date on which the said application and the representations were to be considered were not mentioned, but it was said that the objections were to be filed within 30 days from the date of publication of this notification in the Gazette and that the said applications and the representations, if any, would be considered in a meeting to be notified afterwards.
(2.) In all the writ petitions it is a common ground that the scope of permits on the various route was revised by the Regional Transport Authority itself but the notification publishing the applications in the Gazette under S.57(3) was issued in the name of the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority. The petitioners contend that under S.57(3) of the Act the duty to publish the applications together with the notice of dates is assigned by the said section to the Regional Transport Authority and there being no delegation in favour of the Secretary in that behalf, the notification published by him in the Gazette was unauthorised and the Transport Authority derives no jurisdiction to consider in its meeting the applications so published.
(3.) In reply, the Regional Transport Authority has submitted that the notification, inviting applications for non temporary stage carriage permits, was issued by the Regional Transport Authority and published in the Rajasthan Gazette on Oct. 10, 1985 although the notification had been signed by its Secretary. In response, 63 applications were received in respect of this route which included two applications made by the petitioner himself. All the applications so received were published as per the notification dated 26th Dec. 1985 in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated Feb. 13, 1986. It is admitted that the notification was signed by the Secretary. It was stated that on account of the increase in scope 467 vacancies involving 191 routes came into existence and the same were required to be filled in by the Authority. It was submitted that the publication of the applications by the Secretary, on behalf of the Regional Transport Authority, was purely a ministerial action and it did not require any delegation or authorisation by the authority.;