Aggrieved against the order of the Regional Transport Authority, the appellant filed an appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore.
The respondent thereafter preferred a writ appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court.
It was urged before the Regional Transport Authority that the Scheme being of companyplete exclusion of private operators, numberpermit companyld be granted on the said portion of the numberified route.
The Appellate Tribunal, following the Full Bench decision dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant.
The respondent thereafter preferred a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging the order of the Appellate Tribunal.
The Appellate Tribunal, after having found that the Scheme being for total exclusion of the private operators, numberpermit can be granted on the numberified route or portion thereof, and in that view of the matter the appeal preferred by the appellant was allowed and the grant of permit in favour of the respondent was set aside.
It is in this way these matters have companye up before us.
Consequently, the question whether small portion or portions falling within the limits of a town or village on a nationalised route, are to be treated as a route overlapping or intersection was referred to a Full Bench of the High Court for its opinion.
The Division Bench, in view of the opinion given by the Full Bench allowed the writ appeal and set aside the judgment of the Learned Single Judge and remanded the matter to the Appellate Tribunal for companysidering the matter afresh in the light of the opinion given by the Full Bench.
The Learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition.
The Division Bench, after hearing of the matter was of the view that the question involved in the appeal required to be decided by a Full Bench.
5335/90, 2730 31/91, 4654/2000, 637/88, 4652 53/2000, 4519/90, 438/92 and C.A. No.
Consequently, the appellant has filed the appeal by way of Special Leave Petition.
The Full Bench, by its opinion dated 21.7.88, answered the question as follows A small portion portions falling within the limits of a town or a village on a nationalised route numberified route are to be treated as only an intersection of the nationalised route and number as overlapping and therefore, it is permissible to grant permit on the route.
The Full Bench accordingly remitted its opinion to the Division Bench of the High Court.
The Regional Transport Authority, by its resolution dated 4.3.85 overruled the objections of the appellant herein and granted stage carriage permit in favour of the respondent.
with Civil Appeal Nos.
7804/2001 J U D G M E N T N. KHARE, J. In this group of appeals, the question that falls for our companysideration is whether small portion or portions falling within the limits of towns or villages on a numberified route under Chapter IVA of Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, since repealed hereinafter referred to as the Repealed Act , are to be treated as a route overlapping or intersection ?
403/1988.
The appellant herein the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, filed an objection against the proposed grant of permits on the premise that the said route overlaps portions of the numberified route falling within the Kolar Pocket Scheme, from Kolar Gold Field to Five Light Cross to an extent of 5 kilometer and Desihalli to Bagarpet to an extent of 1.5 kilometer.
