SPA/207/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 2722 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                   AT NAINITAL

 THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN
                                 AND
             THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA


                 SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 207 OF 2021

                             30th July, 2021

Between:

Dehradun Vikas Nagar Dakpathar Motor
Owners Welfare Association & another                ......      Appellants

and

State of Uttarakhand and others                    ......      Respondents


Counsel for the appellants    : Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, learned counsel

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. S.S. Chauhan,            learned    Deputy
                              Advocate General



The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:    (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan)



           Since the learned counsel for the parties agree,

this case is being decided at this stage itself.



2)         The petitioners, Dehradun Vikas Nagar Dakpathar

Motor Owners Welfare Association, and Mr. Ram Kumar

Saini, have challenged the legality of the order dated

22.04.2021, passed by learned Single Jude in Writ Petition

No. 936 (M/S) of 2021, whereby the learned Single Judge

has dismissed the writ petition.
                                   2


3)          Briefly,    the   facts   of   the   case   are     that    the

petitioners-appellants are permanent stage carriage holder

of the route known as Dehradun-Vikas Nagar-Kalsi.                      They

are plying their vehicles covered by permanent stage

carriage    permit,     and   charging     the   fare   fixed    by     the

respondent authorities.         According to the petitioners, the

respondent authorities in their meeting held in January

2020, permitted the petitioner Association to charge the fare

from the individual passenger at the rate of Rs. 1.05 per

kilometer, whereas the State Road Transport Undertaking

has been authorized to charge Rs.1.30 per kilometer.                   The

case of the petitioners is that the respondent authorities

while fixing the rate of fare of the petitioner Association and

for   the   State      Road   Transport    Undertaking     adopted        a

discriminatory view for the reason that for the same distance

petitioner Association was permitted to charge Rs. 1.05 per

kilometer, whereas the State Transport Undertaking has

been given liberty to charge Rs. 1.30 per kilometer. Besides

this, liberty has also been granted to the State Transport

Undertaking to enhance 20 per cent of the fare from Rs.

1.30.       Consequently, the State Transport Undertaking

enhanced its fare from Rs. 1.30 to Rs. 1.50 per kilometer,

but the petitioner Association is being compelled to charge

merely Rs. 1.05 per kilometer.               This, according to the

petitioners, is nothing but a sort of discrimination with the
                               3


private operators. According to the petitioners, they moved

a representation dated 24.12.2020 before the respondent

authorities for redressal of their grievances, but no decision

has been taken on the said representation as yet.



4)         Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, the learned counsel for the

appellants, submits that one of the prayers made by the

appellants-petitioners was to seek a direction from the

learned Single Judge to direct the respondents to consider

the representation dated 24.12.2020, which has been filed

by   the   appellants-petitioners.     For,    according    to   the

petitioners, the State has permitted the petitioners to charge

the fare from the passenger at the rate of Rs. 1.05 per

kilometer, while the State Road Transport Undertaking has

been permitted to charge the same at the rate of Rs. 1.30

per kilometer. Thus, there is a hostile discrimination being

carried out by the State against the petitioners.       However,

the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

learned Single Judge is not justified in observing that the

representation is not a statutory one, and, therefore, no

direction can be issued to the respondents to decide the said

representation.



5)         Mr.    S.S.   Chauhan,    learned   Deputy      Advocate

General for the State, has supported the impugned order.
                                     4




6)           Heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the impugned order.



7)           Even if, filing of a representation may not be a

statutory remedy, nevertheless, the filing of a representation

is a means open to a person to voice his grievance before

the competent authority.                Since, prima facie, there is

difference    in   the   fares      which    are   chargeable     by    the

petitioners and the State Transport Corporation, it was but

natural for the petitioners to feel that they are being

discriminated in a hostile manner. Therefore, the petitioners

were justified in filing representation before the respondent

No. 1.



8)           Once a representation is filed before a Competent

Authority, the Competent Authority is legally bound to

decide the representation after giving an opportunity of

personal     hearing     to   the       person,    who   has    filed   the

representation. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that

the observations made by the learned Single Judge are

unsustainable.



9)           Thus, this Court directs the respondent No. 1 to

decide the representation, filed by the petitioners, within a
                               5


period of three months from the date of receipt of certified

copy of this judgment. Respondent No. 1 is further directed

to decide the representation only after giving an opportunity

of personal hearing to the members of the Association.



10)         With these directions, this appeal stands disposed

of.


                      _______________________________
                         RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, C.J.


                                  _________________
                                     ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 30th July, 2021 Negi