IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION Nos.27045 – 27046/2018 (MV) BETWEEN:
1. SMT.N.PALANIAMMAL W/O SRI JAYAKUAMR AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, MAKKA MOHALLA, NO.64/4, GALIPURA EXTENSION CHAMARAJANAGAR-571 313 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT (PERMIT TRANSFERRED FROM SRI R.RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE RAYAPPA GOUNDAR w.e.f. 19.2.2014) 2. SRI M.K.PONNUSWAMY S/O KOLANDIAH SWAMY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, PROP. N.K.P. SERVICE, PALANIKUTTI GARDEN, DOLLIPURA ATHIGULIPURA POST, CHAMARAJANAGARA-571 313 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI C.V.KUMAR, ADV.) AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, 1ST FLOOR, B.M.T.C. BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR K.H.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN 2. THE TAMIL NADU STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION ERODE DIVISION, CHANNAMALLAIAH ROAD, ERODE, TAMIL NADU-638316 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.MUNIGANGAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI B.N.JAYADEVA, ADV. FOR R-2.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN R.P.Nos.162/2014 AND 163/2014 DATED 09.09.2015 IN SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE R-1 DATED 30.12.2013 PASSED IN SUB.Nos.129/2013 AND 130/2013 IN RENEWING THE PERMITS No.24/98-99 AND 27/98-99 VIDE ANNEXURES-T AND U.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R In the instant petitions, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:
[i] Call for records;
[ii] Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the tribunal in R.P.Nos.162/2014 and 163/2014 dated 09.09.2015 in setting aside the orders passed by the 1st respondent dated 30.12.2013 passed in Sub.Nos.129/2013 and 130/2013 in renewing the permits No.24/98-99 and 27/98-99 vide Annexures- T & U;
[iii] Remand the matter to the tribunal to reconsider the revision petitions as this Hon’ble Court passed in similar matters on 03.05.2017 in writ petition Nos.49713-720/2018 vide Annexure-AB;
[iv] Pass fresh orders or such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deem fit, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. Brief facts of the case are that the first petitioner had the permit bearing No.3/82-83 to run the bus from the Chamarajanagar to Nanjanagud. He had taken new permit bearing No.24/98-99. The latest renewal is during the period from 28-08-2013 to 27- 08.2018. Similarly, the second petitioner had the permit bearing No.11/67-68. He has also permitted to take new permit bearing No.27/98-99 to run the bus from T.N. Pura to Chamarajanagar. The latest renewal of permit is during the period from 28.08.2013 to 27-08.2018 at Annexures-B and F dated 17.01.2014 and 30.12.2013 respectively.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the second respondent preferred revision before the Revisional Authority. The revisional authority reversed the order of the Original Authority dated 21.07.2014 and 30.12.2013 on 09.09.2015. Thus, the petitioners are before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that before the Revisional Authority, two issues were raised namely, renewal of permit is contrary to Tamil Nadu Area Scheme and permit was not saved under he Karnataka Scheme in particularly, Mysore and Bangalore. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that even though there is delay in questioning the validity of the Revisional Authority’s order dated 09.09.2015, it is for the reasons that the certain issues were pending on the judicial side so also the Government has issued order on 28.09.2017 and 07.03.2019 by which such of those persons who are holding permit as on 14.01.2002 and 18.12.2014, they are entitled to renew their permit. It was submitted that in view of the Government decision dated 28.09.2017 read with 07.03.2019, the Revisional Authority’s order is required to be set aside and the matter requires re- hearing before the Original Authority for the purpose of renewal of permit.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that time and again, petitioners’ permit were under challenge. On one or the other ground the petitioners are enjoying the benefit of renewal of permit. The Original Authority is required to take note of contentions raised by the second respondent read with para 14 of the decision in W.P.Nos.2772-2774/1995 and connected matters decided on 23.07.1999.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. It is evident that as on 09.09.2015, the petitioners were not entitled for renewal of permit in view of the non-saving Clause under the Karnataka Scheme in particularly, Mysore and Bangalore. Whereas the Government has issued orders on 28.09.2017 and 07.09.2019 by which the petitioners had a cause of action, seeking for renewal of permit in view of the Saving Clause for such those persons who are holding permit as on 14.01.2002 or 18.12.2014, they are entitled for renewal of permit. Undisputedly on both the dates petitioners permit was in vogue.
8. In view of these later developments, Revisional Authority’s order dated 09.09.2015 [Annexures-T and U] and the Original Authority’s order dated 17.01.2014 and 30.12.2013 [Annexures-B and F] are set aside.
9. The matter is remanded to the Original Authority for deciding the petitioners’ grievance relating to entitlement of renewal of permit afresh.
10. Both the petitioners as well as the respondents are permitted to file additional statement before the Original Authority to apprise whether the petitioners are entitled for renewal of permit or not. In this regard, the parties are hereby directed make such additional statement, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.
11. The Original Authority is hereby directed to decide the petitioners’ application as well as the statement of the respondents and to pass speaking order after due consideration of each of the contentions of the parties raised and to be raised if any. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the petitioners’ as well as the respondents’ additional statements, if any.
In terms of the above, writ petitions stand allowed.
Sd/- JUDGE NC/HB