Karnataka High Court
M Krishna Bhat vs Karnataka State Transport Authority on 6 June, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
WP No. 16630 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 16630 OF 2021 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. M KRISHNA BHAT S/O BHIMA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
MACHIMALE HOUSE
ARYAPU VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK
DAKSHNA KANNADA 574210
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B R SUNDARA RAJA GUPTA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
1ST FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING
KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD
SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE 560027
BY ITS SECRETARY.
Digitally 2. KARNATAKA STATE ROAD
signed by
KIRAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION
KUMAR R KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD
Location: SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU 560027
HIGH BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
3. SHAIK RIYAZ HUSSAIN S/O S A WAHAB
MEHABOOB MANZIL, ANGAUR, VIDYANAGAR
KASARGOD-671121, KERALA.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RADHA RAMASWAMY, AGA FOR R-1;
SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY.T., ADVOCATE FOR R-2;
SRI. C.V.KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
WP No. 16630 of 2021
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER OF THE R-1 PASSED IN SL.NO.1 SUBJECT NO.278/2017
DATED 08.06.2018 PRONOUNCED ON 11.07.2018 AND THE
ORDER OF THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL PASSED IN APPEAL NO.261/2018 DATED 10.08.2021
VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND J, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. On 03.09.2013 the Stage Carriage Permit issued in
favour of the petitioner for the route Kasaragod to Puttur
via: Vittla, Perla, Badiyadka (2 RTs) was renewed for a
period of five years from 19.11.2013 to 18.11.2018. This
renewal was endorsed and countersigned by the Kerala
State Transport Authority, Thiruvananthapuram, on
11.03.2014 vide Annexure-A2.
2. On 06.05.2017, the petitioner was issued with the
notice by the Additional Commissioner for Transport and
Secretary, KSTA stating that there was a proposal to re-
consider the grant of additional single/ vehicle in respect
of the Stage Carriage permit which had been issued in his
favour and which was valid till 18.11.2018 in the light of
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal
No.4480/1998 in the case of G.T.Venkataswamy
Reddy vs. State Transport Authority and others. The
petitioner was directed to appear before the Karnataka
State Transport Authority on the 03.06.2017.
3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said notice,
preferred W.P. No.61694/2016 challenging the said notice,
contending that the Authority had no jurisdiction to
reconsider the grant of the Stage Carriage permit dated
03.09.2013. This court, after hearing the petitioner and
the respondent, proceeded to pass an order in the
following terms:
"5. Having heard the learned counsel for all
parties, I find that this writ petition need not be
entertained at this stage. Petitioner is only called
upon to appear before the respondent - authority in
connection with the subject regarding
reconsideration of grant of additional vehicle in
respect of stage carriage permit held by the
petitioner. It is open to the petitioner to appear
before the respondent - authority and take up
preliminary objection with regard to jurisdiction of
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
the respondent to proceed in the matter. If such an
objection is taken, respondent shall first consider
the question of jurisdiction and then proceed in the
matter in accordance with law. It would be open for
KSRTC to appear before the respondent and also
file its objections, if any.
6. With the above observation, Writ Petition is
disposed of. In view of the observations made
permitting the KSRTC to approach the respondent,
it is unnecessary to implead the KSRTC in this case
at this stage. Hence, I.A.1/2016 is disposed of as
unnecessary."
4. Pursuant to the said order, the Karnataka State
Transport Authority proceeded to pass an order on
03.06.2017 canceling the additional round trip granted to
the petitioner under the Stage Carriage permit dated
03.09.2013. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said
order, preferred an appeal before the Karnataka State
Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.9/2018, which was allowed
by the Appellate Tribunal on 16.01.2018 with a specific
direction to consider the contention advanced by the
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
petitioner touching upon the jurisdiction of the Authority to
re-consider the permit granted.
5. The petitioner, thereafter, also filed his written
submissions as per Annexure-F. In the said written
submissions, the petitioner raised the specific contention
that the Authority had no jurisdiction to issue a notice in
the light of a Division Bench Judgment of this Court
rendered in ILR 1987 KAR 3255 at para 41, which is
reproduced for the sake of brevity as under-
"4. During the pendency of this Writ Petition a
further development occurred. On 15-7-1087, the
STA granted the temporary-permit on the route to
the KSRTC with effect from 29-7-1987, in
substitution of the one granted to appellant-
Sharma. The STA observed ;
"The route is included in the
existing reciprocal agreement dated 1-4-
1979 entered into between the State of
Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh vide
Appendix "C" Sl. No. 10 providing
provision for operation. This provision
was utilised in favour of KSRTC since the
grant made in favour of one Sri D.P.
Sharma was withdrawn by the KSTA
D.P. Sharma v. State Transport Authority, ILR 1987 KAR 3255
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
allowing, however to lapse the temporary
permit on the date of expiry of his prior
temporary permit upto 28-7-1987.
In the circumstances, application
for temporary permit is perused and after
satisfying the need, I pass the following
orders :
ORDER NO. STA 6 TP 71/86-87
dated 15-7-1987 :
In exercise of the powers under Section
62 of the M.V. Act, 1939 delegated to me
under Rule 94-A and 96 of Karnataka
State Transport Authority do hereby grant
the temporary permit for a period from
29-7-1985 to 31-10-1987 subject to
countersignature by the State Transport
Authority, Andhra Pradesh on single point
tax and subject to usual conditions
attached to the permit.
...... ...... ......
This development was not brought to the
notice of the Learned Single Judge, on 20-7-1987
when he disposed of the Writ Petition. Accordingly,
appellant-Sharma has filed LA. IV in this appeal to
have that order also quashed."
6. Despite the said contention being advanced by the
petitioner, the Transport Authority has proceeded to pass
the impugned order without even considering the specific
contention raised by the petitioner regarding jurisdiction.
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
In fact, the reasoning given by the Authority is only in the
following terms-
"Heard all the parties. Considering all the
facts of the case as putforth by the Advocates this
Authority has reached a conclusion that additional
trip granted to the applicant has to be cancelled in
accordance with the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court. Hence, it is hereby ordered that the
additional trip granted to the applicant is
cancelled."
7. In the light of the fact that the petitioner raised a
specific contention, the order passed by the Authority
without considering the contentions and which has been
confirmed in appeal by the Karnataka State Appellate
Tribunal cannot be sustained.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner is right in
contending that since a specific question relating to the
jurisdiction of the State Transport Authority was raised, it
was incumbent upon the Authority to consider the same
and record a finding on that contention and in the absence
of any finding recorded by the Authority, the order passed
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
by it cannot be sustained and its affirmation in appeal also
cannot be sustained.
9. Learned counsel appearing for the Karnataka State
Road Transport Corporation, Sri.Hareesh Bhandary
contended that the period for which the permit was
granted stood expired on 18.11.2018 itself, and therefore
there was no need to consider the contentions advanced
by the petitioner.
10. Sri. B.R. Sundara Raja Gupta, learned counsel for the
petitioner, in response, contended that the application filed
by the petitioner for renewal was not being considered in
the light of the orders passed by the State Transport
Authority and the Karnataka State Appellate Tribunal.
11. In the light of the fact that the period for which
Stage Carriage Permit was granted for the petitioner stood
expired on 18.11.2018 and in the light of the fact that an
application for renewal has also been made, the State
Transport Authority would be bound to consider the said
NC: 2024:KHC:19642
application filed by the petitioner and while so doing, the
Authority would have the liberty to consider all the
objections that may be raised by the petitioner as well as
by the contesting respondents. This petition is, therefore,
disposed of directing the Authorities to consider the
renewal application of the petitioner and also reserving
liberty to the contesting respondents to raise all such
objections for the renewal. Subject to the above, Writ
Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
12. While considering the petitioner's application for
renewal, the rejection orders passed at Annexures-G and J
shall not be taken into consideration as the reason for
rejecting his application for renewal and the application of
the petitioner for renewal shall be considered strictly in
accordance with the merits.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HNM
