Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Suman Ghosh vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 4 October, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Rai Chattopadhyay
W.P.A No. 20052 of 2024
Suman Ghosh
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the Petitioner : Mr. N. I. Khan,
: Mr. Amlan Kumar Mukherjee.
For the State : Mr. Anand Farmania,
: Ms. Indumouti Banerjee.
Heard on : 04/10/2024
Judgment on : 04/10/2024
Rai Chattopadhyay, J. :-
1. The writ petitioner had applied for the permit of stage carriage on the route
from Polerhat to Shyambazar, vide his application dated 15th May, 2023. That
was not considered and the petitioner sought for intervention of this Court, by
filing a writ petition. With the Court's direction, he has again submitted his
online application dated 2nd August, 2023 along with the requisite fees. He
also submitted therewith the proposed clash-free time table.
2. The RTO North 24 Parganas, has passed an order dated 2nd August, 2023,
that along with the petitioners application dated 15th May 2023, he has not
Page 2 of 6
submitted the other requisite documents. There it has further decided that
petitioner's application for permit shall be taken up for consideration by the
RTA board in its fourth coming meeting dated 8th August 2023.
3. Board's resolution in this regard is dated 22nd August, 2023. By dint of the
same the Board has rejected petitioner's prayer for grant of licence. Three-fold
reasons have been cited there, for such rejection of the petitioner's application
for grant of permit, as follows :
"1. Not submitted clash free time table with existing 16 nos. vehicles
which are plying at present.
2. NOC from Shyambazar Traffic Guard, Kolkata Police & Cossipore
PS, South 24-Parganas to be obtained due to traffic congestion
observed at stating and terminating point.
3. The route is overlapping with the route 211 of RTA, Kolkata in
mostly as repeated by existing operators of the said route.
Hence the case may be rejected."
4. Being aggrieved the writ petitioner filed his second case, before this Court
being WPA No. 8 of 2024. Vide order of this Court dated 16th January, 2024,
the Court set aside the said resolution of the Board dated 22nd August, 2023
and directed for reconsideration of petitioner's prayer for grant of permit.
5. Hence, the same was considered again and an order dated 20th February,
2024 was passed by the RTA Board, North 24 Parganas. The Board has found
that the proposed route would spread through 3 districts and that major
portion thereof that is a stretch of 19 kilometres would fall within jurisdiction
of North 24 Parganas Authorities. Rest 5 kms would be under jurisdiction of
South 24 Parganas district and 3 kms thereof, would be within Kolkata.
Accordingly, it decided that the Secretary would seek "no objection certificate"
Page 3 of 6
from the corresponding RTA authorities of South 24 Parganas district and
Kolkata district.
6. In compliance with such decision of the Board, the Secretary thereof,
communicated with his counter-parts in the said two districts, for grant of no-
objection certificate, that is, vide letter dated 13th March, 2024.
7. The reason for petitioner's grievances is with respect to the silence maintained
by the respective regional transport authorities of the districts of South 24
Parganas and Kolkata, in response to the letter dated 13th March 2024, as
mentioned above.
8. Mr. Khan, Ld. Advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that such
action on the part of the said regional transport authorities, is jeopardising
petitioner's right of livelihood, in so far as, in absence of the certificates of "no
objection" being issued by those authorities, the petitioner would not be able
to obtain a permit, as has been prayed for by him. Mr. Khan would indicate
that the petitioner would otherwise be eligible for grant of such a permit, in
terms of the statutory provisions.
9. The State is the principle respondent in this case represented by Mr.
Farmania. He submits in the Court a written instruction from the Office of
the Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata Region, which has been forwarded
to him, in connection with the present petitioner's case. Mr. Farmania has
strongly relied on that. Such instruction is on the basis of the Board
resolution of RTA Kolkata, dated 31st July 2024, to deal with the letter dated
13th March, 2024, as mentioned above. The Board considered that in the said
proposed route, 3.5 kms length and 1km length are aligned commonly, with
the other two routes under jurisdiction of RTA Kolkata. This meeting was
postponed to 29th August, 2024. On the said date the Board adopted another
resolution, thereby rejecting grant of any "no objection certificate" to the
petitioner. Here, two-fold reasons were shown. Firstly, regarding common
alignment, as mentioned above. The other reason has been mentioned to be
the objections raised by the existing operators namely, North Eastern Bus
Syndicate.
10. The writ petitioner is the intending operator in the route Polerhat to
Shyambazar Khalpol via Bhangore, Gajipur, Shikharpur, Lauhati, Rajarhat,
Kalipark, Chinarpark, Joramandir, Baguiati, Lake Town, Ultadanga Station,
Khanna, Shyambazar.
11. According to the Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata, the said proposed
route overlaps routes No. 211, 211A and 211B, under its jurisdiction, by a
length of 3.5 and 1 kms respectively. However the said respondent is unable
to show that if overlapping of the route, should restrain grant of new permit
under any statutory provision, till the time the intending operator is able to
propose a clash free timetable. In this case, the petitioner has produced a
clash free timetable, which has been accepted by the concerned respondent
authority. In such circumstances and pursuant to the liberal policy as
promulgated by dint of the Act of 1988, the Court finds no legal bar in
granting "no objection certificate", or so to say, a route permit, in favour of the
writ petitioner.
12. Rest remains the objection raised by the existing operators as regards grant of
"no objection certificate", to the petitioner. For this the Court relies on the
verdict of the Supreme Court reported in (1992) 1 SCC 168 [Mithilesh Garg
vs Union of India]. The Court has been pleased to hold there that the existing
operators would not be eligible to put forth any objection as to grant of new
permit, in view of the liberal policy under the statute, unless on the grounds
of illegality, arbitrariness or colourable exercise of power by the issuing
authority. The same view has been again reiterated by the Full Bench of this
Court, in the case of Prabhat Pan & Ors vs State of West Bengal & Ors
[(2015) 2 CHN 185].
13. Hence, the law is settled in this regard. Existing operators would have no
scope or authority to challenge the grant of permit to an intending operator,
under any circumstances whatsoever, excepting the said, grant being tainted
with any alleged illegality or arbitrariness or colourable exercise of power by
the authorities in granting him the permit. In the instant case, not any such
ground has been put forth. Therefore mere overlapping of the route alignment,
should not be entertained as a viable ground for declining grant of "no
objection certificate" to the petitioner.
14. The discussion as above, prompts this Court to hold that the decision of the
respondent No.2/RTA Board Kolkata, vide its resolution dated 29 th August,
2024, thereby declining to grant "no objection certificate" with respect to the
petitioner's prayer for grant of permit, as above, is not in conformity with the
existing law. Thus the same is illegal and not maintainable. The Court sets
aside the said resolution of respondent No.2 dated 29th August, 2024.
15. The instant writ petition is to be allowed.
16. The instant writ petition No. WPA 20052 of 2024 is allowed and disposed of
directing the respondent No.2/RTA Board Kolkata, to grant a "no objection
certificate" as regards the prayer of the petitioner for grant of licence and in
response to the letter of the respondent No.7/ Secretary, Regional State
Transport Authority, North 24 Parganas dated 13th March, 2024.
17. The same has to be issued within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt
of copy of this order by the respondent No.7.
18. It is directed further that after receipt of the "no objection certificate", as above
the Regional Transport Authority, North 24 Parganas, shall take necessary
steps to issue permit to the petitioner as prayed for, in accordance with the
law.
19. Writ petition No. WPA 20052 of 2024 is disposed of.
20. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are
deemed to be denied.
21. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the
parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)
Tudu/p.a
