Civil Appeal No 879 of 1975
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 4th November 1974 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ No 4346 of 1974
Hardyal Hardy section K Mehta K B Nagaraja P N Puri M Qamaruddin and K Khanna for the appellant
O P Sharma for respondent No 1
Luxmi Grover and section section Jauhar for respondent No 3
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GOSWAMI J
This appeal by special leave is against the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court summarily dismissing a writ application under article 226 of the Constitution against the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal Punjab
The appellant is a private limited company carrying on transport business over a long period
The company was granted 33 stage 219 carriage permits for various routes
It had a sanctioned fleet of 35 transport vehicles
On receipt of several reports and complaints from various sources the State Transport Commissioner issued the following show cause notice to the appellant on March 28 1974 Regd
From section Balinder Singh IAS State Transport Commissioner Punjab
To The Managing Director New Samundri Transport Company P Ltd Ferozepur
No 455JFI2 dated Chandigarh the 28th March 1974
Subject Departmental Action
Memorandum A list of prosecutions launched against your company by the Operational Staff is forwarded herewith
The offences committed are of a very serious nature
Your company is also short of fleet of fit vehicles
A copy of the joint report of the Secretary Regional Transport Authority Jullundur and Motor Vehicles Inspector Jullundur relating to the condition of buses of your company is also enclosed
Due to the shortage of fit vehicles against the sanctioned fleet of 35 buses number of services are being missed whereby the public is being put to a great inconvenience
You are therefore required to show cause as to why departmental action by way of suspensioncancellation of stage carriage permits under section 60 of the  should not be taken against your Company
Reply should be sent to this office within 10 days of the receipt of this notice failing which it will be presumed that you have nothing to say
State Transport Commissioner Punjab
The appellant says that an explanation was posted to the Commissioner within time under certificate of posting
According to the Commissioner it was not received
The District Judge who is the State Transport Appellate Tribunal observed in his order that some mischief appears to have been committed in the office of the respondent with regard to the reply which was sent under postal certificate
220 We will however proceed on the assumption that no explanation was sent by the appellant to the Commissioner
Even so a manifestly wrong procedure in a departmental action of this nature is obvious on the face of the above notice resulting in violation of the principles of natural justice
The notice was issued under section 60 of the briefly the Act which may be quoted 601The transport authority which granted a permit may cancel the permit or may suspend it for such period as it thinks fit a on the breach of any condition specified in sub section 3 of section 59 or of any condition contained in the permit or b if the holder of the permit uses or causes or allows a vehicle to be used in any manner not authorised by the permit or c if the holder of the permit ceases to own the vehicle or vehicles covered by the permit or d if the holder of the permit has obtained the permit by fraud or misrepresentation or e if the holder of the permit not being a private carrier s permit fails without reasonable cause to use the vehicle or vehicles for the purposes for which the permit was granted or f if the holder of the permit acquires the citizenship of any foreign country Provided that no permit shall be cancelled unless an opportunity has been given to the holder of the permit to furnish his explanation
Sub section 3 of section 60 provides for composition of breach of certain conditions
Section 593 contains the conditions laid down for every permit
The target of section 60 is the permit that has been issued breach of conditions of which is the subject matter of action under it except in cases covered by section 601 d and f
It is true that for each permit the permit holder is responsible and he is the person who has to submit the explanation
The proposed penal action has to be particularised with reference to each permit detailing the particular conditions for breach of which action is sought to be taken in connection with a particular permit
This is the minimum requirement of section 60
What we find in this case is a kind of bald notice making no reference to any particular permit for cancellation or suspension of which action has been taken
It is as if all the 33 permits were going to be suspended or cancelled
It is clear that after receipt of the various reports the Commissioner did not apply his mind to scrutinise the same 221 for the purpose of taking appropriate legal action against any specific permit under section 60 of the Act
On the other hand taking the reports as they were which may as well have been general allegations against the permit holder immediately action was taken for suspension or cancellation of all the permits
From the list of prosecutions we find only 15 vehicles are involved and most of the cases are of overloading
Some of the cases relate to non accompaniment with the vehicles of registration certificates and other documents
In some cases against certain vehicles the time schedule was not kept and certain trips were missed
We are not at all on the merits of these prosecutions
What is important in a departmental action of this type for violation of conditions of permit is that it must relate to the particular permits appertaining to concerned vehicles
It is of utmost importance that charges are made with reference to each permit in clear terms in order to enable the permit holder to furnish his explanation
Proviso to section 601 which requires mandatory compliance is nothing short of a reasonable opportunity to the permit holder to furnish his explanation
Unless therefore the breaches of conditions or other allegations are particularised with reference to each permit in the show cause notice such notice is clearly invalid and no action can be taken under such a notice
This is exactly what has happened in this case resulting in violation of the principles of natural justice ingrained in the proviso to section 601 of the Act
The High Court therefore was not right in not interfering with the order of the authorities cancelling the permits
In the result the appeal is allowed
The order of the High Court as well as the orders of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner are set aside
We will however make no order as to costs
PBR Appeal allowed


Summary:
Section 60 of the empowers the State Transport Authority to cancel or suspend a permit granted by it under certain circumstances
The proviso to the section states that no permit shall be cancelled unless an opportunity has been given to the holder of the permit to furnish his explanation
On receipt of reports and complaints regarding the appellant the State Transport Commissioner issued a show cause notice to it without specifying therein the nature of complaints
Action was taken for cancellation of the permits
The High Court summarily dismissed the writ petition of the appellant filed under article 226 of the Constitution against the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal
Allowing the appeal to this Court  HELD 1 The High Court was not right in not interfering with the order of the authority cancelling the permits
A manifestly wrong procedure in a departmental action of this nature is obvious on the face of the notice resulting in violation of the principles of natural justice
221D 220A 2 The proposed penal action has to be particularised with reference to each permit detailing the particular conditions for breach of which action is sought to be taken
Proviso to section 601 which requires mandatory compliance is nothing short of a reasonable opportunity to the permit holder to furnish his explanation
Unless the breaches of conditions or other allegations are particularised with reference to each permit in the show cause notice such notice is clearly invalid and no action can be taken under such a notice
220G 221D