CWP No.9819 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.9819 of 2007 Date of decision: 21.10.2008 Punjab Roadways, Ludhiana through its General Manager -----Petitioner Vs. Guru Teg Bahadur Coop. Society Limited, Patiala and others -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.N.MITTAL Present: Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl.A.G.Punjab for the petitioner. Mr. Baldev Kapoor, Advocate for respondent No.1. Adarsh Kumar Goel, J 1. This petition seeks quashing of order dated 5.10.2005, Annexure P.1, passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh, directing grant of permit in favour of respondent No.1. 2. In pursuance of notice dated 15.12.1992, inviting applications for grant of three Stage Carriage Permits to operate three return trips on Sultanpur-Ludhiana via Kapurthala-Jalandhar route, several applications were made. One of the permits was granted to the Punjab Roadways, the petitioner herein. The Punjab Roadways did not lift the permit. Respondent No.1 who was one of the unsuccessful applicants, preferred an appeal and, inter-alia, 1 CWP No.9819 of 2007 submitted that the petitioner having not lifted the permit, the same be granted to it. 3. The Tribunal allowed the appeal. Following finding was recorded:- “Under section 104 of the Act, a permit can be issued to any other person on temporary basis, till it is not issued to a STU, only where no STU has made an application for a permit. In the present case, an application was duly made by respondents No.3 and the permit was granted to it. However, respondent No.3 failed to get the permit issued, within the statutory period of six months. Therefore, the permit to any other person, in the circumstance, is not to be issued on temporary basis but on regular basis. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal is allowed to the extent that the appellant to be granted one regular stage carriage permit, with one return trip daily, on the route in question, earlier granted to respondent No.3, Punjab Roadways, Ludhiana and not lifted by it. RTA, Jalandhar is directed to issue the permit to the appellant within three months of the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, subjected to usual conditions. RTA record be returned. Appeal filed be consigned to the record room.” 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2 CWP No.9819 of 2007 5. Contention raised on behalf of the petitioner-Punjab Roadways is that grant of permit in favour of respondent No.1 was contrary to the Scheme dated 9.8.1990, as amended on 21.10.1997, envisaging maintenance of ratio between permit to a private operator and the STU on different routes. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the route in question was not a nationlised route nor an inter-State route and the ratio laid down in the scheme was not disturbed. The Punjab Roadways did not lift the permit for a period of 13 years till the date of order of the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal dated 5.10.2005 was challenged by the Punjab Roadways in Writ Petition filed in July 2007. In the meanwhile, respondent No.1 was already granted the permit and is operating the same. It is also submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court did not interfere with the grant of permit in CWP No.123 of 2006 (Punjab Roadways, Nawanshahar v. Patiala Bus Highways Pvt. Limited, Patiala and others, decided on 1.5.2007 and CWP No.9215 of 2006, (Punjab Roadways Chandigarh v. Ambala Bus Syndicate Private Limited Ropar and others), decided on 3.7.2006. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner asked us to consider the question whether the appellate authority should have followed the same procedure as the original authority when vacancy arose 3 CWP No.9819 of 2007 by not lifting of permit but learned counsel for respondent No.1 points out that neither the State Transport Commissioner has raised any such point nor any other willing operator has come forward. We, thus, do not go into this question. 8. Following the view taken by this Court in Patiala Bus Highways Pvt. Limited, Patiala and Ambala Bus Syndicate Private Limited, Ropar (supra), we dismiss this petition. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge October 21, 2008 (L.N.Mittal) ‘gs’ Judge 4