- (1.) The instant petitions have been filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter called "the Corporation") being aggrieved by the judgment and orders of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") dated 6-12-97 and 17-1-98 passed in the revision petition and appeals filed by the contesting respondents herein against the resolution passed by the Regional Transport Authority (hereinafter called "the R.T.A."), by which the Corporation was permitted to lift the permit within the extended period of thirty days vide order dated 22-1-1996 and rejection of the applications for grant of permits in favour of respondents, namely, Mr. Pawan Kumar and Mr. Rishi Kumar vide order dated 27-5-1996 on Rajgarh-Hissar via Jhumpa inter-State route.
(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the Corporation had been granted permanent stage carriage permits on the said route in 1982 and it plied its vehicle up to 1995 as the permits had been renewed from time to time under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called "the old Act). The issue of renewal of permits granted under the provisions of the Old Act, which has been repelled by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called "the Act") came (up) for consideration in various cases before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In M/s. Gurucharan Singh Baldeosingh v. Yashwant Singh, 1992 (1) SCC 428, the Court considered the provisions of S. 217 of the Act and held that the permit granted under the Old Act can be renewed under the provisions of the Act. However, in Secretary, Quilon Dist. Motor Transport Workers' Co-operative Society Limited v. Regional Transport Authority, AIR 1995 SC 82, the Apex Court took a contrary view and held that the permits granted under the Old Act would survive till their life expires. However, they are not renewable under the provisions of the Act though such a permit-holder can apply for fresh grant of permit. The controversy has been resolved by a Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in Gajraj Singh v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, AIR 1997 SC 412 : (1996 All LJ 1767) up-holding the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Secretary, Quilon Dist. Motor Transport Workers' Co-operative Society Ltd. (supra). The same view has been taken subsequently by the Supreme Court in Prakash Chand Sahu v. S.T.A., 1997 (3) JT (SC) 681.
(3.) In the backdrop of this controversy, the petitioner-Corporation, whose permits granted under the Old Act had been renewed under the provisions of the Act and the same were valid up to 3-10-97 and 12-7-99, applied for fresh grant of permits and R.T.A. granted the permits vide its Resolution dated 21-8-95. However, conditions were imposed to the effect that the petitioner- Corporation would lift the permit within the period of sixty days from the date of said Resolution otherwise the grant would automatically lapse and as the permits were granted on inter-State route, the Corporation would get those counter-signed by the State Transport Authority, Haryana within a period of six months. Petitioner-Corporation filed an application on 22-12-1995 stating that it was not aware of the grant in its favour as the said resolution had not been communicated to it and the permit could not be lifted, thus, the period may be extended by thirty days and the Corporation may be allowed to lift the permit within the said extended period.;