Rajasthan High Court - JodhpurSmt. Lalita Parihar vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 October, 2022Author:Vijay BishnoiBench:Vijay BishnoiHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT\n                      JODHPUR\n\n\n                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13693/2020\n\nShri Anil Bhati S/o Shri Raja Bhati, Aged About 41 Years, By\nCaste Ghachi, R/o 429, Gali No. 5, Milkmain Colony, Jodhpur\n(Raj.).\n                                                                           ----Petitioner\n                                         Versus\n\n\n1.        State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n          Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n          Parivahan Marg, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiyan,\n          District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Respondents\n                                 Connected With\n\n\n                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11417/2020\nVirendra Singh S/o Shri Hari Singh, Aged About 54 Years, R/o\n86, Baldeo Nagar, Masuriya, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                           ----Petitioner\n                                         Versus\n1.        State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n          Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        The     State     Tranposrt         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj,     Mini\n          Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n4.        Purkha Ram S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiya,\n          District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Respondents\n\n                          (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:07 PM)\n                                            (2 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11452/2020\nDama Ram S/o Shri Moti Ram, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of\nJato Ka Bas, Boranada, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Purkha Ram S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi,\n       Osiya, District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13683/2020\nSmt. Sunder Kanwar W/o Shri Swaroop Singh, Aged About 24\nYears, By Caste Charan, R/o Talia, Utrada Judia, Tehsil Bales,\nJodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiyan,\n       District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13684/2020\nSmt. Ganga Devi W/o Shri Mohan Lal Gurjar, Aged About 56\nYears, R/o 345, Rameshwar Nagar, Basni, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n\n\n                       (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:07 PM)\n                                           (3 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiyan,\n      District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13685/2020\nShri Narendra Kumar S/o Shri Ganga Vishan Brahmin, Aged\nAbout 53 Years, R/o Sarmikpura, Masuria, Near Silavato Ki\nMaszid, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n      Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13690/2020\nMehardin S/o Ushman Khan, Aged About 51 Years, By Caste\nMusalman, R/o Muktja Ki Gali, Siwanchi Gate, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Marg, Jaipur.\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:07 PM)\n                                               (4 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n          Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Respondents\n                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13696/2020\nSaraj Khan S/o Sher Mohad., Aged About 54 Years, By Cast\nMusalman, R/o F-10, Marudhar Nagar, Pal Link Road, Jodhpur\n(Raj.).\n                                                                           ----Petitioner\n                                         Versus\n1.        State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n          Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n          Parivahan Marg, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiyan,\n          District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Respondents\n                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 32/2021\nShri Sohan Lal Jat S/o Shri Shri Durga Ram Jat, Aged About 38\nYears, R/o 49 Salawas Road, Sangariya, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                           ----Petitioner\n                                         Versus\n1.        State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n          Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n\n\n\n\n                          (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:07 PM)\n                                           (5 of 31)                   [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n      Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 39/2021\nShri Sohan Lal Jat S/o Shri Shri Durga Ram Jat, Aged About 38\nYears, R/o 49 Salawas Road, Sangariya, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n      Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 57/2021\nArjun Singh S/o Gishu Singh, Aged About 41 Years, By Caste\nRajput R/o 345, Second D Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.    The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Chiman Singh S/o Sohan Singh, Char Thamba, Mangra\n      Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                              (6 of 31)                   [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 61/2021\nShri Hari Singh S/o Jethu Singh, Aged About 60 Years, Behind\nJ.p. School, Kheme Ka Kua, Pal Road, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n1.        State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n          Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Chiman Singh S/o Sohan Singh, Char Thamba, Mangra\n          Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 97/2021\nShri Anil Bhati S/o Shri Raja Bhati, Aged About 40 Years, By\nCaste Ghachi, R/o 429, Gali No. 5, Milkman Colony, Jodhpur\n(Raj.).\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n1.        State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n          Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Chiman Singh, R/o Char Thamba, Mangra Punjla,\n          Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 98/2021\nShri Dhnna Ram S/o Shri Poona Ram Jat, Aged About 31 Years,\nR/o Nai Basti, Pal, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n\n\n                         (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                           (7 of 31)                   [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                                     Versus\n1.     State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n       Thamba, Magra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 99/2021\nShri Mukesh Purohit S/o Shri Jaswant Singh, Aged About 46\nYears, R/o 345, Second D Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.     State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.     The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Chiman Singh, R/o Char Thamba, Mangra Poonjla,\n       Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 114/2021\nShri Rajendra Singh Charan S/o Shri Durga Ram Charan, Aged\nAbout 45 Years, R/o 3Aa-30-31, Madhuban Housing Board,\nJodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.     State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                           (8 of 31)                   [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Chiman Singh, R/o Char Thamba, Mangra Poonjla,\n       Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 116/2021\nShri Bala Ram S/o Shri Bhura Ram, Aged About 41 Years, By\nCaste Jat, R/o Kareli Nadi, Jhanwar, Luni, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.     State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Ossia,\n       Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 119/2021\nShri Ashok Kumar Tiwari S/o Shri Anjani Kumar, Aged About 56\nYears, By Cast Sharma, R/o Opp. Girls School, Jalori Gate,\nJodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.     State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n\n\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                              (9 of 31)                   [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Pukh Raj, R/o Chawandi, Osiya, District Jodhpur\n          (Raj.).\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n\n\n                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 122/2021\nShri Laxmi Kant S/o Shri Harshkant Brahmin, Aged About 38\nYears, R/o 3 Ch 9, Madhuban Housing Board, Basni, Jodhpur\n(Raj.).\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n1.        State     Of   Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n          Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Pukh Raj, R/o Chawandi, Ossia, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                    S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 123/2021\nShri Yashpal Singh Charan S/o Shri Rajendra Singh, Aged About\n23 Years, R/o 3Aa-30-31, Madhuban Housing Boar,d Jodhpur\n(Raj.).\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n\n\n1.        State     Of   Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n          Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n\n\n\n                         (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                              (10 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n5.       Shri Chiman Singh, R/o Char Thamba, Mangra Poonjla,\n         Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 125/2021\nShri Vijay Mewara S/o Shri Nemi Chand, Aged About 39 Years,\nBy Cast Kalal, R/o 5A, 19 Sector, Kudi Bhagtasani Housing\nBoard, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                          ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n\n\n1.       State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n         Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n         Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.       The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n         Region, Jodhpur.\n3.       Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.       The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n         Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 136/2021\nAshok Kumar Tiwari S/o Shri Anjani Kumar, Aged About 56\nYears, B/c Sharma, R/o Opp. Girls School, Jalori Gate, Jodhpur\n(Raj.)\n                                                                          ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n\n\n1.       State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n         Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n         Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.       The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n         Region, Jodhpur.\n3.       Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.       The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n         Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.       Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n         Thambha, Magra Punjala, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n\n\n\n                         (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                            (11 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 137/2021\nKistur Ram S/o Shri Aidan Ram, Aged About 57 Years, B/c Jat,\nR/o Nai Basti, Pal, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State     Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Ossia,\n       Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 161/2021\nShri Bhanwar Singh Rajput S/o Shri Hari Singh, Aged About 52\nYears, R/o 86 Baldeo Nagar, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State     Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj, R/o Chawandi, Osiya, District Jodhpur\n       (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 162/2021\nShri Mukesh Purohit S/o Shri Jaswant Singh, Aged About 46\nYears, R/o 345, Second D Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n\n\n                       (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                            (12 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n       Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 164/2021\nShri Mahendra Singh S/o Shri Bansi Singh Rajput, Aged About\n38 Years, R/o 1A/117, Kudi Bhagtasani Housing Board, Basni,\nJodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj, R/o Chawandi, Ossia, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 473/2021\nHarish S/o Nemi Chand, Aged About 42 Years, 1/16, D.d.p.\nNagar Madhuban Housing Board, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n\n\n                       (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                           (13 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n3.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n4.    Pukh Raj S/o Poona Ram, Chawandi, Osiya, District\n      Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 479/2021\nHarish S/o Shri Nemi Chand, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 1/16,\nD.d.p. Nagar Madhuban Housing Board, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.    The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiya,\n      District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 549/2021\nShri Sarvan Ram S/o Harlal Jat, Aged About 33 Years, R/o\nVishnu Ki Dhani, Chandelal, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n      Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                           (14 of 31)                 [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 569/2021\nShri Deo Kishan S/o Khadu Ram, Aged About 55 Years, By Caste\nBishnoi, R/o Bishnoio Ka Bas, Near Railway Station, Manaklao,\nJodhpur.\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n\n\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Chiman Singh S/o Sohan Singh, Char Thamba, Mangra\n      Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n\n\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 647/2021\n\n\nShri Ramesh Bishnoi S/o Shri Chunni Lal Bishnoi, Aged About 41\nYears, R/o Singho Ki Dhani, Basni, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                       ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n\n\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.    The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char Thamba,\n      Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                            (15 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 734/2021\nSmt. Lalita Parihar W/o Shri Rajendra Parihar, Aged About 28\nYears, By Cast Sen R/o Bholibai Ka Mandir, Khanda Falsa,\nJodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiya,\n       District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 783/2021\nShri Ramnarayan S/o Shri Madhav Ram, Aged About 34 Years,\nBy Cast Jat, R/o Rampura, Bhatiyan Ramsani, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiya,\n       District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 786/2021\nBhanwar Singh S/o Hari Singh, Aged About 52 Years, By Caste\nRajput, R/o 86, Baldeo Nagar, Masuria, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n\n\n                       (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                           (16 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur\n4.    The     State      Transport        Appellate        Tribunal     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Purkha Ram S/o Poona Ram, Chawandi, Osiyan, District\n      Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 787/2021\nShri Vijay Mewara S/o Shri Nemi Chand, Aged About 39 Years,\nBy Cast Kalal, R/o 5A, 19 Sector, Kudi Bhagtasani Housing\nBoard, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.    The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n      Region, Jodhpur.\n3.    Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.    The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n      Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.    Shri Purkha Ram S/o Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Ossia,\n      Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                  ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 789/2021\nShri Manoj Parihar S/o Shri Kishore Singh Sain, Aged About 36\nYears, R/o Bheru Chowk, Soorsagar, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                      ----Petitioner\n                                     Versus\n1.    State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n      Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n      Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n\n\n                      (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                              (17 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n          Thamba, Magra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 791/2021\nSmt. Indra Jat W/o Shri Kistura Ram Jat, Aged About 55 Years,\nR/o 230, Nai Basti, Pal, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n1.        State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n          Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.        The     Sate    Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n          Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.        Shri Pukh Raj S/o Shri Poona Ram, R/o Chawandi, Osiya,\n          District Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                     ----Respondents\n                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 793/2021\nShri Yashpal Singh Charan S/o Shri Rajendra Singh, Aged About\n23 Years, R/o 3Aa-30-31, Madhuban Housing Board, Jodhpur\n(Raj.).\n                                                                         ----Petitioner\n                                        Versus\n1.        State    Of    Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary     Cum\n          Commissioner,         Transport         Department,         Sahkar       Marg,\n          Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.        The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n          Region, Jodhpur.\n3.        Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n\n\n\n\n                         (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                            (18 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n4.     The     Sate     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,      Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretariat, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Chiman Singh, R/o Char Thamba, Magra Poonjla,\n       Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1007/2021\nShri Mangi Lal S/o Shri Moti Lal Brhmin, Aged About 43 Years,\nR/o Madhuban Housing Board, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n\n\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     The     State     Transport         Appellate        Tribunal,     Raj.,    Mini\n       Secretrate, Bani Park, Jaipur.\n5.     Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n       Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1311/2021\nShri Jora Ram S/o Shri Pukh Raj, Aged About 44 Years, R/o\nBasni Ii Phase, Tandiya Ki Dhani, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                        ----Petitioner\n                                      Versus\n\n\n1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary      Cum\n       Commissioner,          Transport         Department,         Sahkar        Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n       Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                   ----Respondents\n\n\n                       (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                         (19 of 31)                 [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1318/2021\nShri Poona Ram S/o Kola Ram Bishnoi, Aged About 41 Years, R/o\nBishnoio Ka Bas, Manaklav, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                   ----Petitioner\n                                   Versus\n\n\n1.     State   Of   Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary   Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport       Department,         Sahkar     Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur.\n4.     Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n       Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.).\n                                                                ----Respondents\n\n\n               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1452/2021\n\n\nShri Jora Ram S/o Shri Pukh Raj, Aged About 44 Years, R/o\nBasni Ii Phase, Tandiya Ki Dhani, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                   ----Petitioner\n                                   Versus\n\n\n1.     State   Of   Rajasthan,          Through         The     Secretary   Cum\n       Commissioner,         Transport       Department,         Sahkar     Marg,\n       Parivahan Bhawan, Jaipur.\n2.     The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur\n       Region, Jodhpur.\n3.     Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region , Jodhpur.\n4.     Shri Chiman Singh S/o Shri Sohan Singh, R/o Char\n       Thamba, Mangra Poonjla, Jodhpur (Raj.)\n                                                                ----Respondents\n\n\nFor Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. R.K. Rathi\n\nFor Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Sudhir Tak, AAG with Mr. Saransh\n                               Vij\n\n\n\n\n                    (Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)\n                                         (20 of 31)                   [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOIJudgment / Order\n\n18/10/2022\n\n\n    These    writ      petitions         have        been        filed    by   the\n\npetitioners being aggrieved with the action of the\n\nrespondent - transport authorities of not issuing fresh\n\nstage carriage permits to operate city buses on City Bus\n\nRoute No.15 + 15 A in the city of Jodhpur.Since,   the      controversy             involved          in   these     writ\n\npetitions is identical, the facts of SBCWP No.13693/2020-Shri Anil Bhati Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.are taken\n\ninto consideration for adjudicating the dispute.\n\n    The petitioner has filed an application on 5.4.2018\n\nbefore the respondent No.2 - the Secretary, Regional\n\nTransport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur for grant of\n\none stage carriage permit to operate city bus on City Bus\n\nRoute No.15 + 15 A, which came to be disposed of by the\n\nrespondent No.2 vide order dated 31.5.2019 while\n\nobserving that since sufficient number of public transport\n\nis available on the aforesaid route; there is no demand\n\nfrom the public at large to raise stage carriage permits;\n\ntaking into consideration the prevalent traffic load and as\n\nthere is no vacancy available, the application for issuance\n\nof additional/fresh stage carriage permit filed by the(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(21 of 31)              [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\npetitioner is liable to be rejected.The respondent No.2\n\nhas also observed that as per the order dated 27.2.2007\n\npassed by the Division Bench of this Court inDBCWP\n\nNo.6073/1993 - Mahendra Lodha Vs. State of\n\nRajasthan, the number of permits to the city buses\n\ncannot be issued more than 250 as per the observations\n\nmade by the National Green Tribunal, Central Zone\n\nBench,       Bhopal       in      Application            No.49/2014      about\n\nincreasing pollution in the city of Jodhpur, it is not\n\nadvisable to issue fresh stage carriage permits on the\n\nconcerned city bus routes.Being aggrieved with the rejection of the application\n\nfiled by the petitioner vide order dated 31.5.2019, the\n\npetitioner has preferred an appeal before the State\n\nTransport Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, however, the said\n\nappeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.2.2020\n\n(Annex.7).Being aggrieved with the orders dated 31.5.2019\n\nand 28.2.2020 passed by the respondent Nos.2 and 4\n\nrespectively, the petitioners have preferred these writ\n\npetitions.Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that\n\nthe action of the respondents of rejecting petitioners'\n\napplications     for      issuance           of     additional/fresh      stage(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(22 of 31)              [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\ncarriage permits on City Bus Route No.15 + 15A is\n\nabsolutely illegal. It is further argued that the Division\n\nBench of this Court inMahendra Lodha's case (supra)\n\nhas restrained the number of permits up to 250 on the\n\nroute in question, but as a matter of fact, against 250\n\npermits, only 216 permits are in operation and, as such,\n\nvacancies      are   available,         but      the       respondents    have\n\nillegally rejected the applications filed by the petitioners\n\nwhile holding that no vacancy is available.\n\n    Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted\n\nthat as per the provisions of theMotor Vehicles Act, 1988(for short 'the Act of 1988'), no limit for grant of permits\n\ncan be fixed under the said Act. It is argued that Sub-\n\nsection (3) ofSection 71of the Act of 1988 provides that\n\nthe State Government could not exercise the function of\n\nlimiting operation of vehicles by fixing the number of the\n\nsame unless the Central Government forms an opinion in\n\nthis regard.It is argued that in the instant case, the Central\n\nGovernment has not formed any opinion with regard to\n\nnumber of such vehicles and, therefore, the action of the\n\nrespondent Nos.2 and 4 of not granting stage carriage\n\npermits to the petitioners is absolutely illegal and without\n\njurisdiction. It is submitted that in the absence of(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(23 of 31)              [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\nnecessary       statistics,       the       respondent          -   transport\n\nauthorities cannot be allowed to reject the applications of\n\nthe petitioners for grant of stage carriage permits merely\n\nby saying that there is no vacancy of permit and the\n\nroute is adequately served by existing operators and\n\nfurther grant of permit will lead to congestion. It is\n\nfurther argued that the need of increase in permits on the\n\nconcerned city bus route is very much there as the limit\n\nof issuing 250 permits was fixed way back in the year\n\n2007 inMahendra Lodha's case (supra), however, after\n\nthe   year   2000,       population            is     increased     and   the\n\nrequirement of more public transport is very much there.\n\nIt is also submitted that the existing number of permits\n\ni.e. 216 is not sufficient to cater the needs of the public\n\nat large, however, the respondent - transport authorities\n\nhave failed to take into consideration the above situation\n\nand have illegally rejected the petitioners' applications for\n\nissuing additional stage carriage permits on the route in\n\nquestion.Learned     counsel        for      the        petitioners    has   also\n\ncontended that the traffic on the concerned route is\n\ndecreased since 2020 and, as such, issuance of additional\n\nstage carriage permits on the concerned route will not\n\nresult in traffic congestion or increase of pollution. It is,(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(24 of 31)                 [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\nthus, prayed that the impugned orders passed by the\n\nrespondent - transport authorities may kindly be set\n\naside and the respondent - transport authorities be\n\ndirected to grant stage carriage permits to the petitioners\n\non the city bus route No.15 + 15A in the Jodhpur city.In support of the submissions, learned counsel for\n\nthe petitioners has placed reliance on the decision of the\n\nKerala High Court rendered in the case of Saidalavi Vs.\n\nThe    Secretary,          Regional             Transport            Authority,\n\nMalappuram and Ors. [WP (C). No.10617 of 2013\n\n(B).D/d. 06.10.2016]; decision of Uttarakhand High\n\nCourt in the case of Vivek Kumar Tandon Vs. State of\n\nUttaranchal & Ors., reported in 2009 AIHC 1034 and\n\ndecisions of the Madras High Court in the cases ofS.\n\nRaja    Vs.    The     Secretary             (Home)              Transport    III\n\nDepartment, State Government of Tamilnadu & Ors.\n\n[W.P. No.12531of 2020 and W.M.P.Nos.15782 and\n\n15784     of   2020         D/d.        06.10.2020               and   Thomas\n\nMadasamy        Vs.      The       Regional             Transport        Officer\n\nMadurai [W.P.(MD) Nos.6729, 6730, 6731, 6732,\n\n6733 and 6734 of 2019 and W.P. (MD) No.6729 of\n\n2019 D/d. 23.07.2020.Opposing the writ petitions, learned counsel for the\n\nrespondents has argued that the writ petitions filed by(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(25 of 31)              [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\nthe petitioners are not maintainable as the petitioners are\n\nhaving an alternate and efficacious remedy of filing\n\nappeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal as\n\nconstituted under the provisions ofSection 89(2)of the\n\nAct of 1988. The respondents have also urged that the\n\npetitioners have filed these writ petitions challenging the\n\norders dated 31.5.2019 and 28.2.2020 passed by the\n\nrespondent Nos.2 and 4 respectively and the letter dated\n\n30.11.2002 issued by the Transport Commissioner and\n\ndue to misjoinder clubbing of two different cause of\n\nactions, these writ petitions are not maintainable on\n\nmerits.Learned counsel for the respondents has argued that\n\nthe   respondent       -     transport           authorities     have    not\n\ncommitted any illegality in passing the impugned orders\n\nwhile taking into consideration the overall facts and\n\ncircumstances of the case. It is submitted that at\n\npresent, there is no need for increase of stage carriage\n\npermits on the concerned routes as sufficient number of\n\npublic transport vehicles are plying on the said routes and\n\nincrease in number of said permits will result into traffic\n\ncongestion and increase of pollution. It is also argued\n\nthat the Regional Transport Authority is very much in\n\njurisdiction in declining to issue fresh permits on the(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(26 of 31)                    [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\nconcerned routes and there is no force in these writ\n\npetitions and the same are liable to be dismissed.\n\n    Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused\n\nthe material available on record.So far as the preliminary objection raised by learned\n\ncounsel for the respondents is concerned, I am of the\n\nview that merely availability of alternate remedy is not a\n\nbar in entertaining the writ petitions by the High Court\n\nwhile exercising its extra ordinary jurisdiction. It is true\n\nthat ordinarily a writ court cannot entertain a petition\n\nwhere remedy of filing statutory appeal is available to the\n\nparty, but it is also true that availability of alternate\n\nremedy itself is not a bar in entertaining a petition in its\n\nextra ordinary jurisdiction and looking to the facts and\n\ncircumstances of the case, the High Court can entertain a\n\npetition despite availability of alternate remedy.\n\n    The   facts   of     the      present          case       are    clear    and\n\nunambiguous, hence, this Court decides to ignore the\n\npreliminary objection raised by learned counsel for the\n\nrespondents and proceeds to decide the writ petitions on\n\nmerits.So far as the contention of learned counsel for the\n\npetitioners to the effect that as per the provisions of Sub-section 71(3)of the Act of 1988, the respondent -(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(27 of 31)                [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\ntransport authorities have no jurisdiction to limit the\n\nnumber of stage carriage permits or contract carriage\n\npermits until and unless the Central Government forms\n\nan opinion with regard to the number of vehicles, road\n\nconditions and other relevant factors is concerned, the\n\nsame has lost its relevance because the number of stage\n\ncarriage permits in the Jodhpur city is restricted up to\n\n250 as per the directions issued by this Court inMahendra Lodha's case (supra).The Hon'ble Division\n\nBench of this Court inMahendra Lodha's case (supra)\n\nhas passed the order dated 21.11.2000, relevant portion\n\nwhereof, reads as under :"G. One of the major pollutants\n        identified in various affidavits is the Tempos.\n        We are informed that there are about 436\n        Tempos plying in the city. In addition, there\n        are three wheelers, city buses, mini doors.Considering the material available on\n        record, it is directed that there shall be\n        complete ban on moving of tempos on the\n        main road starting from Darpan Cinema to\n        Sojati Gate, Railway Station and Jalori Gate.\n        On these routes, the number of city buses\n        shall also be reduced to 250."The said order/directions issued by the Division\n\nBench    inMahendra          Lodha's            case       (supra)   made\n\nabsolute vide judgment dated 19.2.2007 while disposing\n\nthe above-referred case. As such, it is clear that number(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(28 of 31)                    [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\nof stage carriage permits for city buses on the concerned\n\nroute i.e. 15 + 15A, starting from Darpan Cinema to\n\nSojati Gate, Railway Station and Jalori Gate is restricted\n\nto 250.Now the question remains as to whether the\n\nrespondent   -   transport          authorities              are   justified   in\n\nrejecting the application filed by the petitioners for\n\nissuing stage carriage permits on the concerned city bus\n\nroute. It is not in dispute that out of maximum limit of\n\n250 stage carriage permits, only 216 are in currency. The\n\nrespondent - transport authorities had refused to grant\n\nadditional stage carriage permits on the concerned city\n\nbus route, firstly, on the ground that sufficient public\n\ntransport is available on the concerned route and if the\n\nnumber of permits is increased on the said route, it may\n\nlead to traffic congestion and increase in pollution,\n\nwhereas the National Green Tribunal, Central Zone\n\nBench, Bhopal has already raised concern about increase\n\nof pollution in the Jodhpur city. The respondent -\n\ntransport authorities have also observed that since\n\nsufficient number of public transport is available, there is\n\nno public demand to increase the means of public\n\ntransport and taking into consideration the existing traffic\n\ncongestion, it is not advisable to issue new permits. It is(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(29 of 31)                  [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\ntrue that under the liberalized policy, ordinarily the\n\ntransport authorities should not refuse to grant permit,\n\nhowever, as per proviso to Sub-section (2) ofSection 80of the Act of 1988, the Regional Transport Authority,\n\nState   Transport      Authority           or     any       other      prescribed\n\nAuthority can refuse the application for grant of permit\n\nafter providing reasons in writing and after providing\n\nopportunity of being heard to the applicant. In the\n\npresent matter, opportunity of hearing was provided to\n\nthe petitioners and reasons have also been given by the\n\nrespondent - transport authorities for refusing to issue\n\nnew state carriage permit in favour of the petitioners.\n\n    The argument of learned counsel for the petitioners\n\nthat traffic on the concerned route is decreased is difficult\n\nto digest. The Division Bench of this Court, way back in\n\nthe year 2000, after taking into consideration the traffic\n\nconditions and the possibility of increase in pollution, has\n\nrestricted the number of permits on the concerned route\n\nup to 250 and it cannot be said that the traffic on the\n\nconcerned route is decreased today i.e. in the year 2022\n\nand risk of increase of pollution is not there. Everyone\n\nknows that with the increase of population, number of\n\nvehicles,   private       or     public,         have           been   increased\n\nenormously. The traffic on the said route increased(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(30 of 31)                 [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\nmanifold since year 2000 and, in such situation, no\n\ndirection can at all be issued for increase in the permits.\n\n    Taking    into      consideration              the      above     facts   and\n\ncircumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the\n\nreasons   supplied         by       the       respondent         -     transport\n\nauthorities for not issuing permits in favour of the\n\npetitioners   cannot        be      said      to      be     unreasonable       or\n\nunjustified in any manner.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mithilesh Garg and\n\nOrs. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., [Writ\n\nPetition (Civil) No. 1345 of 1989, decided on\n\n22.11.1991] has held as under :"17. ...... It is not disputed that the\n      Regional Transport Authority has the power\n      under the Act to refuse an application for\n      grant of permit by giving reasons. It is for\n      the authority to take into consideration all\n      the relevant factors at the time of quasi-\n      judicial consideration of the applications for\n      grant of permits. The statutory authorities\n      under the Act are bound to keep a watch on\n      the erroneous and illegal exercise of power in\n      granting permits under the liberalised policy."The Division Bench of Calcutta High Court inState\n\nof West Bengal and Ors. Vs. Kalyan Chakrabarty\n\n[M.A.T. Nos.1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 2356,\n\n2357 and 2358 of 2005, decided on 8.9.2005] has\n\nheld as under :(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)(31 of 31)              [CW-13693/2020]\n\n\n                                             "30. Considering all such facts and\n                                        circumstances and having regard to the\n                                        aforesaid discussion we are of the opinion that\n                                        the respondent cannot be said to have\n                                        unfettered right to get a permit for operating\n                                        an Auto-Rickshaw in the route for which\n                                        application was made. The right underSection\n                                        74of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is also\n                                        subject to reasonable restrictions. Such\n                                        restrictions may emanate from various\n                                        sources which include a subsequent change of\n                                        situation arising out of too little space for too\n                                        many vehicles, congestion, pollution, road\n                                        conditions, public conveyance and so on and\n                                        so forth."There is no quarrel about the ratio of the judgments\n\n                                   rendered by different High Courts on which learned\n\n                                   counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance, however,\n\n                                   in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the\n\n                                   same are of no help to the petitioners.In view of the above discussion, the writ petitions\n\n                                   being bereft of force are hereby dismissed.\n\n                                       Stay petitions are also dismissed.(VIJAY BISHNOI),J\n\n                                    ms rathore(Downloaded on 19/10/2022 at 08:59:08 PM)Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)