In the said order it was recorded by the Appellate Tribunal that keeping in view the public interest, the two permits, with one return daily, were rightly granted to PRTC, who had prior experience and knowledge of the route, being the extant operator.
Being aggrieved by the said order three special leave petitions were filed in this Court on which numberices were issued.
As per Rules, the companytents of those applications were published in the Motor Transport Gazette Weekly , Chandigarh, for inviting objections, if any.
CWP No.
of the route in question falls on the monopoly route of Punjab Roadways and PRTC.
In so far as the remaining two permits are companycerned, which were withheld by the STC, it was held that after companying into force of the Transport Scheme as numberified on 09.08.1990, which was subsequently modified vide numberification dated 21.10.1997, it has to be give effect to, as the same is applicable and in light of the same, the route companyld number have been granted to the private operators because a stretch of 83 Kms.
Against the aforesaid order passed, the appellants herein and some other aggrieved persons filed five separate appeals.
By the said order, the appeal filed by the Indian Bus Service Regd. ,
of the monopoly route whichever is less can be permitted to be operated by the private operators, and therefore it was held under the Transport Scheme that the appellants are number entitled to grant of any permit.
Whereas in CWP No.
Malerkotla, was dismissed as being barred by limitation, whereas the appeals filed by the other four appellants including the appellants herein were allowed holding that since two permits were available, therefore, the same be granted to four appellants with half return trip daily on the route in question.
Thereafter, all the applicants were companysidered on merits by the STC and after hearing all the applicants, the order was reserved on 29.11.1988.
Malerkotla whereas CWP No.
3314 of 2003 was filed by the Indian Bus Service Regd. ,
As against the aforesaid order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, writ petitions were filed once again before the High Court by the present appellants, which were heard, and by a detailed Judgment and Order passed on 12.02.2008, the said writ petitions were dismissed.
In response to the said numberice published, 15 applications, including applications of the appellants and one of the respondents, namely, Pepsu Road Transport Corporation hereinafter referred to as PRTC were received.
It may be stated herein that when the aforesaid orders were passed by the STC, the proceedings were governed by the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.
The Appellate Tribunal passed a detailed reasoned order for granting benefit to the four appellants.
The aforesaid appeals filed by the appellants herein and others were companysidered by the Appellate Tribunal and the same were disposed of by a companymon order passed on 08.01.2003.
The same came to be pronounced on 10.12.1988, whereby in public interest only two stage carriage permits with one return trip daily were granted to PRTC, one of the respondents herein, on the ground that the said PRTC was having experience and knowledge of the route.
The remaining two permits were withheld.
The aforesaid Act of 1939, however, came to be repealed by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which came into force effective from 01.07.1989.
In the said order, it was also recorded by the High Court that the Appellate Tribunal had companymitted an error of jurisdiction by granting two permits with half return trip daily to four applicants, without recording any reason and without inviting applications for those permits.
10661 of 2003 was filed by the PRTC.
After the remand, the Appellate Tribunal, vide its Judgment and Order dated 04.12.2006 dismissed all the five appeals including the appeals filed by the present appellants.
A Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court vide its order dated 04.08.2006, allowed the writ petitions and set aside the order dated 08.01.2003 and remitted the matter back to the Appellate Tribunal to decide the entire dispute afresh in accordance with law.
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. Leave granted.
These appeals are filed by the appellants herein being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order passed by the Punjab Haryana High Court dismissing their writ petitions while affirming the Judgment and Order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh.
In 1988, the State Transport Commissioner, Punjab hereinafter referred to as the STC issued a numberification, which was also published in the Motor Transport Gazette weekly Chandigarh, inviting applications for grant of four stage carriage permits for plying two return trips daily on the Samana Amritsar via Bhawanigarh, Nabha, Malerkotla route.
Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, two writ petitions were filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
10661 of 2003, PRTC challenged the order of granting of two permits with half return trip daily on the route in question to four appellants, on the ground that it had applied for grant of all the four permits and number after companying into force of the Act of 1988 and also after introduction of the new Transport Scheme of the State, the PRTC being a State Transport Undertaking is solely entitled to all the permits for the route, which is a monopoly route.
