HQH §€3U%’§7 §3F ¥Q$,€2§?§£%En Afn§ILA5PL¥R : €2HE§E¥§§$G£R§4 $INGLE 5ENGH : HQN’ELE $HRI 5R. NA¥AK, CKEL Wgw EEFLTSON N0. £25§ §Fu 2&G6. Vighram Qgre aged abmgt 6O year$ S/o Shri Jeevarakhan Ogre Mungen‘ Distt. Bilaspur {6.6.} PETiTwNER Versu$ Regionaf Trangpmi Authariiy Bilaspur (CA3) Secretary, Regierial Trampont Auihoriiy Raipur M/s Rainbcw Travets Preprieter —~ Anurag Shukia Ravi Nagar, $huk¥a €oloney Raipur 4. State Tfanspmi Ameilate T§ibun3£ RE5PGN§ENT3 ‘ The Regiana! Transport Autharity, Bila$pur by its mrder dated ‘x/2l2005 gramed regmar permit ta the third respondent herein for mute Raipur tn Khudi-a, When that nermit was assaiied befare the STM', the $TAT withmrt ttnding any merit tiianissed the anneal by its omer dated 3OI8QUOS. Hence, this writ netitien has been filed. (2) The facts Qf this tase, in brief, are as fallovw: The petitioner made an agpiicatien 8/4K2805 fer grant 0f reguiar permit an the aferementioned mute, whereae the third reepondent atee made eppiicetion en 8l12/2005 ter grant ef reguter permit fer the same mute. tt aeeeare that the Regtenei Treneeert‘ Authcrity had tixed Edit/2305 es the dete for heering 0f bath the applicatiens, but, hearing did Raipur‘ Pr$$eni : 3M Ajay Shrivaatava, {gamed mumsei fer fhe petiiionw, $hri Samay .3. Agréwai, 'iearned $.A. for we State / rewondent‘s 1 cant! 2_. 8km Aneap Maiumiiar, learned cuungel for rewandent No.3 @RAL GR§ER) {Fassed on 30th August. 20¢S§ mat iak€ maae on 24%1f2006. Subwqueniw, considering the appHcaticm {sea'mi’t wa$ granteti €o the third ragpandent. (3) The cantention af {earned coumel far the pecitianer a‘a €ha€ the Regiena! Tmnapcrt Auihai’ity wght i0 have dubbed fha applicatiaa 6f ihe getiticmer with ihat 0f im third rewandent, cen5§derec§ them together and havmg asses3ed the relative merita 0f the applicam3 might to have granted the :‘egwar hermii ta a mast eeitabke eandidate, and the preceeme fehewed by ihe Regbhal “(rename Autheréhj is ex fecie ii3ega! anti vioietive ef the phmipah of hatea‘ai juehce. (4) i have perused the creer made by the RegEehal Thanspert Authehty ee we” ass the arder made by the STAT. What weEghed with bath the eteiutery autheritiee not i0 gyaht permit he the pehtiener and io grant hermit to the ihird respendent ie the feet ihet fhe petitianer had aaeo meee an apphcafioh before the Regiehel Tranepert Auzhority, Reipur fer reguiar permit fee ihe mute Khudia to Raipur and in that apphcation he hae mentiened the motorevehicle bearing registration NeL‘GIG ~N7425. Acimittediy, the petiticner has ehewn the same vehicle ih both the applications. Therefere, it cannot be eaid. that the reason assigneci by the Regional Transpert Aethority and the STAT ie net a valid ene reievent ground te refuse graht to the petitioner. it is true that after Erin/26%, he hearing wee given to the eetitieher, hut, the admitteti feet remaine that the petitiener showed the same bee ih heth the epeiicatiens. When this eositien is net eehtestee, giving a hearihg t0 the petitieher eeufd he eh empty formality. The petitioner‘s eouheei was hot in e eeeitieh te teii the mutt haw hie ciieht is prejudieed he eeriyihg eeheitehity e? herr§ heat-i {5) The ethet eehtehtieh reieee hy the eeriztehe; 1.; 4.1— met Lthe timihge :eeghec‘ te the third respehtteht fer eperetieh ere ihtettering with the t§mings a55%gned ii} the ge:i€§<3nér wider ather §ermit$ aFe cmaidered by the STAT and has opined that the timmgs have been awigned is} the pe€§tionef and we ihird fewondent—apaatcr, kewing i5 mind the pabkk intere5t m garrem! am‘é €€ave€i§ng pumi»: §n pamsular. ¥t is needkaas to $tate thaf while as$ignmg *ihe iimings £0 any aperator, the pretiominan‘: mmiciera‘tém which 3hcauid g0 inte the decigmn making by the statutory authsriy under the Makw Vehicbs Aci‘ is the need and intere3t 0f the traveliing pubtic and. net the interest ef individuai cperater. it that i3 the ccnsideratien which has gene into the deaieiewmakihg by the statuteiy authority in assigning the timings to the petitiener and te the thirst respottdent fot epeteting their buses, he exception ceuld be taken te the same. Here again, the teamed ceuneel wattle harp en the failure ef the Regienai Transpert Authority te give an epeortunity ef being heard. Principies of natural justice are meaht te advance justiee and riot thwart justice. i do net find ahy faiiure of juetice in the ectieh ef the Regienei Transport Aethetity, Biiaepur, as etiirmeet “y the STAT. The writ petitieh ie deveid ef merit anti it i3 aceerdingiy dismieeed. Ne 333*: i e Sdle Chief Justice i