P MANJULA Vs. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals involving common questions of law and facts were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioners in the writ petitions are the appellants. Facts in Writ Appeal No. 983 of 1999;

(2.) The appellant herein was holder of stage carriage permit on town service route Kintali to Collectorate in the town of Srikakulam. The said route was subsequently varied as Collectorate to Pillalavalasa on 26-2-1985: For the said purpose, prior permission of the Transport Commissioner, Hyderabad is required under Rule 282 (2) (ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1964 (for short "1964 Rules"), which is equivalent to Rule 258 (2) (ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for short "1989 Rules"). Such prior permission is required if the town service route is varied to such an extent that it would be beyond eight kilometres from the municipal limits.

(3.) The permit was transferred in favour of the appellant on 23-5-1987. By reason of an order dated 11-11-1987, the said permit was cancelled by the second respondent in implementation of the approved scheme in G.O.Ms.Nos. 1093 and 1094 dated 9-11-1987. A revision petition was filed thereagainst before the first respondent, which was marked as R.P.No. 248 of 1987, and it was partly allowed by an order dated 5-12-1987 holding that the Regional Transport Authority has no jurisdiction to grant variation of mofussil service route to town service and the appellant's town service route from Collectorate to Kintali was set aside. By reason of an order dated 28-11-1987 the second respondent sought to curtail the route of the appellant between Srikakulam to Kintali. A revision petition was filed thereagainst before the first respondent, which was marked as R.P. No. 250 of 1987, and it was dismissed. In the writ petition filed against the said order, by reason of an interim order dated 5-7-1988, the appellant was permitted to ply the vehicle on the original town service route. Facts in Writ Appeal No. 1099 of 1999: