the rta ordered renewal of 11 permits and rejected the objection to the renewal of the appellants in m602sup ci/74 the first group as well as their applications for fresh permits.
k. puri for respondent number 1 in c.a.
1592 1595 of 1971 is by rattan lal gupta uma sharan sharma sewa ram dharam das agarwal land lines pvt.
the appellants in the third group had applied for permits on the shorter route.
from the judgment and decree dated the 30th september 1969 of the allahabad high companyrt in civil miscellaneous writ number.
from the judgment and decree dated the 30th september 1969 of the allahabad high companyrt in civil miscellaneous writ number.
from the judgment and order dated the 30th september 1969 and 28th july 1971 of the allahabad high companyrt in civil miscellaneous writ number.
there were some other applications on june 16 1963 including a second application of m. n. kaushik.
from the judgment and order dated the 30th september 1969 of the allahabad high companyrt in civil miscellaneous writ.
on july 4 1964 some more applications were published for the longer route.
it further held that the grant of six permits forthwith on the longer route was illegal that since the number of applicants for permits on this route were in excess of the number of permits which could be granted numbergrant companyld be made without first fixing the strength of the longer route.
the high companyrt also quashed the orders of the rta and sta dated may 6 8 1965 and august 29 1967 respectively.
ibrahim and his union of the existing operators objected to these applications.
seven more petitions were directed against the orders of the rta of 6th to 8th may 1965 item c and of the sta of 29th august 1967.
c. a. number 95 of 1965 decided on 27 10 67.
there are also two special leave petitions number.
the appellants in the first group objected to these renewals and prayed for grant of fresh permits to them for the longer route.
number.
on 28th and 29th august 1964 the rta companysidered only ii renewal applications and 12 fresh applications and other applications were number even put up before the rta.
the ground given was that numbere of the objectors and 12 applicants for fresh permits had turned up.
subsequently about six miles of kachcha route was companysidered motorable and then the rta on 18 7 1958 declared that muzaffarnagar budhana kandhla route be extended upto issupurteel.
mohds.
1634 1639 of 1971 is by harish chandra mahendra kumar tayal shanti swarup jain mitranand kaushaik baru mal agarwal gur prasad richpal singh and bhagwan singh sambi.
yogeshwar prasad s. k. bagga s. bagga rani arora and indira manchanda for the appellants in c. a. number.
of this companyrt his client was granted permits by the rta on june 3 1973 on the longer route.
the rta said originally muzaffarnagar budhana kandhla was the name of the route.
3927 of 1967 and sca number 643 a of 1969 respectively.
on july 18 1958 the regional transport authority briefly rta meerut decided to extend the route by about six miles upto issupurteel hereinafter the longer route .
1634 1639 of 1971.
the high companyrt also numbered that it was admitted by all the parties that the strength of 25 had been fixed for the unextended route and that numberstrength of the extended route had been fixed at all.
3892 3135 3136 3137 3138 and 3139 of 1967.
3216 3217 3218 of 1967 and 12 of 1968.
the facts relating to the appeals have got to be narrated in some detail.
it also at the same time set aside that part of the order of the rta of 28th/29th august 1964 by which their applications for fresh permits had also been rejected.
meanwhile 7 renewal applications from the existing permit holders were received between numberember 4 1963 and may 18 1964 in anticipation of expiry of their permits.
the sta by its order dated numberember 10 1964 set aside the order of the rta dated 28th /29th august 1964.
of these five petitions were directed against the order of the sta of august 29 1967.
5210 5246 5398 and 5410 of 1964.
on 2nd to 4th august 1961 the rta had decided that there was only one route upto issupurteel and that applications presented either upto kandhla or upto issupurteel should be companysidered as presented for the entire route viz.
1592 1595/71 and petitioner in slps number.
the longer route.
the high companyrt further pointed out that the reduction of the strength of 25 to 1 1569 1 s. c. r. 730.
four writ petitions were filed in 1964 against the order of sta dated numberember 10 1964.
these were also published in the u. p. gazette on june 16 1963.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
with reference to the first group of writ petitions the high companyrt held that the strength of 25 had number been fixed by the rta for the longer route.
the applications which were received in response to the advertisement were published in the u. p. gazette of september 15 1962.
by suraj bhan in civil appeal number 1628 of 1971 and others.
3094 3095 of 1971.
since this was number done by the rta number by the sta the orders of both were vitiated by patent illegality as regards applications for fresh permits.
and special leave petitions civil number.
civil appeals number.
number.
1592 95 and respondent number 4 in 1634 37 and respondent number.
as there were already 17 permits in operation the rta on june 13 1969 advertised for 8 vacancies in the shorter route and fixed july 27 1959 as the last date for receiving the applications and it appears 1117 applications were received.
number.
p. goyal and v. c. parashar for intervener in c.a.
on october 13 1950 a route for stage carnage permit described as muzaffarnagar budhana kandhla hereinafter the shorter route was classified as b class route and the strength of the permit was fixed at 17.
the state transport appellate tribunal briefly sta approved the extension of the route to issupurteel on august 8 1959.
seven petitions were directed against the orders of both the rta and of the sta made respectively on 6th to 8th may 1965 item 30 a and on 29th august 1967.
suraj bhans application for a permit was published on numberember 2 1963.
there were 19 other writ petitions of 1967 and 1968 be fore the high companyrt which were also heard together.
he objected to the increase in the strength and to the route being wrongly described in the advertisement.
15921595 of 1971.
ibrahim filed his objections to the applications published on september 15 1962.
the appellants in the first group to the sta impleading 8 out of the 11 renewal permit holders.
16281631 of 1971 is.
1628 1629 and 1630/7 1 k. garg and s. c. agrawala for respondent number.
the first group civil appeals number.
on june 13 1964 their objections to the renewals as well as those for fresh permits were published in the gazette.
1 and 2 in 1595 and respondent number 3 in c.a.
limited smt.
4 and 5 in c.a.
the high companyrt therefore set aside the order of the sta dated numberember 10 1964.
civil appeals number 1628 1631 of 1971.
1 in a. number 1594 and appellants in c.a.
number.
number 1628 31 and 1634 39/71 c. aggravala and a. t. m. sampath for respondents number.
to give some more details thirteen applications for the longer route were published on july 1 1961 twenty seven on june 15 1963 and two on numberember 2 1963.
3094 3095/71 .
1638 39/71 the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by goswami j. there are three groups of appeals with certificate directed against the judgment of the allahabad high companyrt of 20th september 1969.
number 1634/71 .
on may 6 8 1965 their objections were overruled and the rta granted 8 permits to the said appellants.
3094 3095 of 1971 which have number been admitted but by an order of this companyrt dated 7th february 1972 the petitioners were allowed to intervene in these appeals.
kusum lata and tribhuvan kumar the last two being the widow and son of madan mohan lal deceased.
the third group civil appeals number.
certain persons had objected to their applications on the ground that the shorter route had ceased to exist.
the second group civil appeals number.
this order was upheld by the sta on august 29 1967.
number 1593 and respondent on c.a.
