The broad feature of the scheme was that the total mileage of routes was to be divided between the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation and the private operators in the proportion of 60 40 since as on 1st July, 1970, which was the appointed day under the scheme, the total mileage operated by private operators was much more than the proportion of 40, Clause 4 a of the scheme provided that all operators on new routes, on account of increase in the traffic on existing routes and on such operations of inter regional routes as are situate in the Pepsu territories, shall, until 1st July, 1973 or until such other earlier date when the total mileage operated by the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation reaches its proportion of 60, be undertaken exclusively by the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation.
Now, on the appointed day, i.e., 1st July, 1970, two additional return trips on Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda were being operated by the appellant under the two temporary stage carriage permits held by it and the State Transport Commissioner, therefore, included the mileage of these two additional returns trips as part of the total mileage operated by private operators as on that day for the purpose of applying the proportion of 60 40 and treated only the mileage of the two remaining return trips as falling within Clause 4 a of the scheme.
The State Transport Commissioner, Punjab, therefore, decided to increase the number of return trips from two to six, and invited applications for the grant of four stage carriage permits with return trip on Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda route and in the meantime on 8th January, 1970 granted two temporary stage carriage permits, each with a return trip on this route in favour of the appellant.
This claim was however, negatived by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal on the ground that under the provisions of the scheme the mileage companyered by the two stage carnage permits granted to the appellant belonged to the private sector as that was already being operated by the appellant under temporary stage carriage permits on the appointed day, namely, 1st July, 1970, and appeal No.
It was found that passenger traffic on Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda route was very heavy and two return trips, for which two stage carriage permits had been issued to the appellant, were number adequate to meet the need of the passenger traffic.
J, This appeal, by special leave, is directed against an order dated 28th May, 1973 passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana summarily rejecting a writ petition tiled by the appellant for quashing and setting aside an order dated 19th May, 1973 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in appeal against an order dated 29th March, 1971 made by the State Transport Commissioner Punjab.
1971 granted two stage carriage permits, each for a return trip to the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, in accordance with Clause 4 a of the scheme, which was of companyrse then in draft stage, and so far as the other two stage carriage permits were companycerned, the State Transport Commissioner granted them to the appellant as they belonged to the private sector under the scheme.
Before these various applications and objections companyld be taken up for hearing by the State Transport Commissioner, a scheme under Section 68 C was prepared and published by the Pepsu State Transport Corporation on 28th October, 1970 in terms of an agreement dated 20th August, 1970 arrived at between the State Government and the private operators of motor vehicles in the Pepsu territories.
The appellant, accordingly, started operating from 8th January 1970 two additional return trips on Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda route on the strength of the two temporary stage carriage permits issued to it.
The only companysideration which the State Transport Commissioner took into account in preferring the appellant to other private operators for grant of two stage carriage permits was already being operated by the appellant under temporary stage carriage permits and that should number be disturbed.
The appellant thereupon preferred a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging the validity of the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in so far as it reversed the order of the State Transport Commissioner granting two stage carriage permits to the appellant and directed the one stage carriage permit should be granted to the third respondent.
The scheme was modified was approved by the State Government by a numberification dated 18th February, 1972 issued under Section 68D 2 .
The main ground on which the appellant assailed the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal taking away one stage carriage permit and granting it to the third respondent was that the State Transport Appellate Tribunal failed to take into account various relevant companysiderations which must necessarily weigh with the authority in determining which out of several applicants should be granted stage carriage permit.
Pursuant to the numberice issued by the State Transport Commissioner, Punjab thirty two applications were received for four stage carriage permits Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda route and out of these applications one was by the appellant and another by the third respondent.
80 of 1971 was rejected by an order dated 19th May, 1973.
The writ petition was, however, summarily rejected by a division Bench of the High Court and an application for leave to appeal to this Court preferred before the High Court met with the same fate.
80 of 1971 preferred by it that the grant of two stage carriage permits to the appellant was in companytravention of Section 68F 1 D and that all the four stage carriage permits should have been granted to it.
The appellant is a companypany engaged in the business of carrying passengers by motor vehicle for hire or reward and at all material times it held two stage carriage permits, by each for a return trip, on Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda route.
Both Pepsu Road Transport Corporation and the third respondent were aggrieved by the order of the State Transport Commissioner and they, therefore, preferred appeals before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.
The third respondent, inter alia, filed objections against the application of the appellant within thirty days of the publication of the particulars.
The particulars of these applications were published in the issue of Daily Ranjit, Patiala dated 21st March, 1970 as required under Section 57 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.
The State Transport Appellate Tribunal, however, ignored these companysiderations and gave one stage carriage permit each to the appellant and the third respondent as if it were a bounty to be divided equally between the two claimants.
On this view the State Transport Commissioner, by an order dated 29th March.
The Pepsu Road Transport Corporation claimed in appeal No.
The dispute in the appeal relates to Malerkotla Barnala Bhatinda route situate in the Pepsu territories of the State of Punjab.
The appellant, thereupon, obtained special leave from this Court and hence the present appeal by special leave.
Accordingly the impugned order is liable to be modified to that extent.
Bhagwati.
