IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 2406 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : 18.02.2008 Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala .... PETITIONER Versus The State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr. R.S. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. Pepsu Road Transport Corporation has filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 19.5.2006, passed by the State Transport Commissioner, Punjab (exercising the powers of Regional Transport Authority, under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988), whereby the application filed by respondent No.3 for grant of increase of return trips from half to one daily on Amritsar to Bathinda via Tarn Taran-Harike-Makhu-Zira-Talwandi-Faridkot-Kotkapura -Jaitu-Goniana route, for which the applicant was holding a valid stage carriage permit, was allowed; and the order dated 16.4.2007, passed by the CWP No. 2406 of 2008 -2- State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the STAT'), whereby the revision filed by the petitioner against the said order has been dismissed. After hearing counsel for the petitioner and going through the impugned orders, we do not find any merit in this petition. To the increase in trips from one to two return trips daily, as initially claimed by respondent No.3, the only objection raised was that there is no public demand for the introduction of more bus service on the route in question and if more bus services are added, the income of the State Transport Undertaking will be affected adversely. While accepting the recommendation of the Survey Officer and rejecting the objection filed by the existing operators, the State Transport Commissioner, Punjab, came to the conclusion that the present bus services available on the aforesaid route are not feeding the requirements of travelling public adequately and with the increase of return trips on the route, the income of State will be enhanced by way of levying of Special Road Tax on the increased trip. Accordingly, the increase of return trip from half to one daily on the route in question was allowed. The revision filed by the petitioner against the said order has been dismissed by the STAT. The only argument raised before the revisional authority was that the observations made by the Regional Transport Authority to the effect that the present bus services available on the route were not feeding the requirements of the travelling public adequately, are not supported by any documentary evidence. The STAT not only has CWP No. 2406 of 2008 -3- rejected the aforesaid contention, which has now been again raised before this Court, while coming to the conclusion that the Regional Transport Authority was within its power to increase the trips, in case it was satisfied that the said increase was in the public interest, but has also observed that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Jashbahi Desai v. Roshan Kumar, AIR 1976 SC 578, the petitioner has not been denied or deprived of a legal right, therefore, it has no locus standi to challenge the said order by filing the revision. In our view, both the authorities have duly considered and appreciated the contentions raised by the petitioner and the order of increase in trips passed by the Regional Transport Authority has been rightly upheld by the STAT. Hence, we do not find the instant case as an exceptional case to exercise the jurisdiction of this Court for setting aside the impugned orders. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE February 18, 2008 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ndj JUDGE