1972 (8) TMI 146 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against High Court judgment quashing order of State Transport Appellate Tribunal based on Government Order preference for permit grant.

Analysis:
The case involves an appeal by certificate against a High Court judgment that reversed the decision of a learned Single Judge and quashed the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The High Court directed the Tribunal to determine the grant of permit "outside the ambit of the impugned Government Order." The dispute arose when the Regional Transport Authority granted one permit each on two out of six routes to the respondent, who claimed maximum operational communication. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal, however, set aside the grant of two permits to the respondent, considering the appellant as the only qualified medium route operator. The High Court held that the Tribunal's decision was influenced by the Government Order, which was a major factor in the decision-making process.

The learned Single Judge initially found that the Tribunal gave preference to the appellant based on being a medium operator but noted additional reasons provided by the Tribunal for the grant of permit. The Single Judge emphasized that mere reference to the Government Order should not be the principal ground for decision-making. However, the High Court, on appeal by the respondent, observed that the Government Order significantly influenced the Tribunal's decision, indicating the respondent as the most qualified medium route operator.

The State Transport Appellate Tribunal specifically mentioned Government Order No. 2265 dated 9 August, 1958, incorporating it into the decision-making process. The Tribunal considered the appellant as the only qualified medium route operator based on being a four-permit holder, contrary to the Government Order's preference for new entrants on short routes and applicants with one or more buses on medium routes. The High Court quashed the Tribunal's order due to the influence of the Government Order in the decision.

The Supreme Court emphasized that Regional Transport Authorities must make decisions unfettered by external guidance and held the Government Order invalid in a previous case. The Court stated that when a Tribunal is directed by the Government to adopt a specific method for assessing applicants and considers such direction, the judicial determination is compromised. Consequently, the Court upheld the High Court's decision, dismissing the appeal and ordering no costs to be paid.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision, emphasizing the need for permit applications to be evaluated independently of the Government Order's influence, thereby dismissing the appeal with no costs awarded.