Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhupinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 18 March, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038368
CWP-20218-2023 1 2024:PHHC:038368
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
CWP-20218-2023
Date of decision : 18.03.2024
Bhupinder Singh
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Lekh Raj Sharma, Advocate,
Ms.Niti Sharma, Advocate and
Mr.Kabir Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.T.P.S. Walia, AAG, Punjab.
Mr.Rohit Kapoor, Advocate
for respondents no.5.
None for respondents no.6 and 7.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1. This is a civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for
setting aside the judgments dated 03.08.2023 (Annexures P-8 and P-9)
passed by respondent no.2 whereby he has accepted the appeal no.105 of
2022 instituted on 12.05.2022 (Annexure P-6) and appeal no.217 of 2022
instituted on 14.07.2022 (Annexure P-7).
2. On 13.09.2023, this Court was pleased to pass the following
order:-
"Inter alia contends that in the present case, the petitioner was
granted one permit with one return ticket vide order dated 23.02.2021 and
the said order has been set aside vide impugned orders dated 03.08.2023
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038368
CWP-20218-2023 2 2024:PHHC:038368
(Annexure P-8 and P-9) on two appeals filed by Amarpreet Sandhu and
Venus Arora on two grounds. The first ground raised was that the
petitioner was less qualified than the said two persons. With respect to the
same, it is submitted that qualification of a person is not a relevant
consideration as per the provisions of Section 71(d) of the Motor Vehicles
Act 1988 as the primary consideration for granting permit is financial
stability of the applicant and the other factors that have been mentioned in
Clause (d) which do not include any educational qualification. It is further
submitted that with respect to the survey report not being in accordance
with law, the said aspect has not been challenged by either of the two
private respondents who had filed the said appeals and for the said
purpose, reference has been made to the grounds of appeal (Annexure P-6
and P-7). It is stated that the petitioner has the permit in his favour and by
virtue of the observations made in the impugned order, although the
matter has been remanded, the petitioner would now not get the permit as
it has been observed that he is less qualified than the appellant.
Notice of motion for 30.11.2023.
Till the next date of hearing, respondent no.3 is restrained from
passing any final order.
September 13, 2023"
3. A perusal of the report of the Registry would show that
respondents no.6 and 7 have been served but no one had appeared on behalf
of respondents no.6 and 7, which was recorded on 30.11.2023 and the
matter was adjourned to 13.03.2024 and on 13.03.2024, the matter was
adjourned to today. Today also, no one has appeared on behalf of
respondents no.6 and 7.
4. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as respondent no.5 have jointly submitted that in the
present case there are two issues involved. The first one pertaining to the
inter se merits between the petitioner and the private respondents and the
second issue pertaining to defects in the survey report. It is jointly submitted
that the advertisement in the present case was with respect to 4 permits with
4 return trips and the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Hoshiarpur,
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038368
CWP-20218-2023 3 2024:PHHC:038368
vide order dated 23.02.2021 had considered the applications of 7 persons
for the grant of 4 stage carriage permits for plying 4 return trips daily, which
was in consonance with the advertisement. It is further submitted that
although in the survey report, it was suggested that 5 permits with 3 return
trips each be considered but the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority,
after taking into consideration the advertisement, correctly considered the
grant of only 4 permits for 4 return trips and granted 3 separate permits to
the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Moga, Bhupinder Singh
(petitioner) and Kamna respectively, with one return trip each and reserved
one permit with one return trip for the State Transport Authority as per the
ratio fixed under the scheme and thus, the slight illegality in the survey
report was duly taken into consideration and rectified by the Secretary,
Regional Transport Authority. It is stated that against the said order, two
appeals were filed and neither of the appellants raised any issue with respect
to the survey report or the impugned order being bad on account of there
being some defect in the survey report. It is further stated that none of the
other applicants either challenged the order of the Secretary, Regional
Transport Authority dated 23.02.2021 or raised any objection on the said
count but however the State Transport Appellate Tribunal by commenting
upon the alleged illegality in the survey report has remanded the matter to
the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority. It is submitted that the remand
orders dated 03.08.2023 (Annexure P-8 and P-9) passed on the said two
appeals are illegal and thus, deserve to be set aside and the matter is
required to be reconsidered by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal for
grant of permits without taking into consideration the aspect as regards the
alleged illegality in the survey report as the Secretary, Regional Transport
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038368
CWP-20218-2023 4 2024:PHHC:038368
Authority in the order dated 23.02.2021 had already taken into
consideration the said aspect. It has been jointly agreed by the counsels for
the contesting parties that the present writ petition be partly allowed and the
impugned orders dated 03.08.2023 (Annexure P-8 and P-9) be set aside and
the State Transport Appellate Tribunal be directed to reconsider the matter
considering all aspects except the aspect of the alleged illegality in the
survey report.
5. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, the
present writ petition is partly allowed and the impugned orders dated
03.08.2023 (Annexure P-8 and P-9) are set aside and the matter is
remanded to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, to re-decide
both the appeals i.e, the appeal no.105 of 2022 instituted on 12.05.2022
(Annexure P-6) and appeal no.217 of 2022 instituted on 14.07.2022
(Annexure P-7) after taking into consideration all the points raised by the
parties, in accordance with law, except on the aspect of the survey report.
6. The parties are directed to appear before respondent no.2 on
06.05.2024.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
March 18, 2024
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
