Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 1961, August 24 of the Patna High Court in M. J. C. No.
P. Verma for respondent No.
July 31.
Thereupon, the appellant applied for a certificate to appeal to this Court, which was refused.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by WANCHOO, J. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of the Patna High Court.
It appears that a new route Gopalganj Pahlezghat was advertised by the North Bihar Regional Transport Authority in July 1957 and applications were invited for permanent stage carriage permits and the advertisement stated that there were two vacancies on the route.
Brief facts necessary for present purposes are these.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
He then moved this Court for special leave, which was granted and that is how the matter has companye up before us.
This order was taken in appeal to the Appellate Authority, which however failed.
195 of 1962.
But the High Court refused to interfere with the rest of the order granting permits to the two other persons.
A number of persons applied for the two permits and in January 1958, the Regional Transport Authority granted permits to the appellant and another person.
Thereupon, the appellant made an application to the State Government under s. 64 A of the Motor Vehicles Act, No.4 of 1939, hereinafter referred to as the Act as amended by the Bihar Amendment 1 1959 Supp.
This companytention was accepted by the High Court, and it set aside that part of the order by which a third permit was granted to the appellant.
To this petition the appellant as well as the two persons to whom permits were granted and the State of Bihar, the Appellate Authority as well as the Regional Transport Authority were made parties.
Thereafter Sudhakar Sharma who is one of the respondents, before us, moved the High Court under Art.
When the petition came to be heard before the High Court it was companytended that the State Government had numberpower when dealing with an application under s. 64 A, to increase the number of permits to be granted from two which was the limit fixed by the Regional Transport Authority, to three, and therefore, its order granting the third permit to the appellant was without jurisdiction.
Goburdhan for respondent No.
126 of 1961.
D. Sharma for respondent No.
Basudeo Prasad, R. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwal and M. K. Ramamurthi for the appellant.
