IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION Nos.15962-15963/2017 (MV) BETWEEN :
1. NATIONAL EDUCATION SOCIETY (R) BALARAJ URS ROAD SHIVAMOGGA – 577201. BY ITS SECRETARY H.M.MALLAPPA S/O LATE H.M.MALLIKARJUNAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/O SHIVAMOGGA – 577201.
2. NATIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL SHESHADRIPURAM SHIVAMOGGA -577201.
BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR & PRINCIPAL NAVEENA M. PAIAS W/O LATE DONAPUS PAIAS AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O SHIVAMOGGA – 577201. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.JAYAPRAKASH.R.V, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY SHIVAMOGGA – 577201.
BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. NAGARIKARA SAMITHI (R) KEDARESHWARA COMPLEX SHANKAR MUTT ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM SHIVAMOGGA – 577201 BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIJAYA KUMAR A.PATIL, AGA FOR R1) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE-H THE FINAL NOTICE DATED 25.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, SHIVAMOGGA (RESPONDENT-1). ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to accept notice on behalf of the respondent No.1.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the final notice dated 25.11.2016 issued by the respondent No.1 (Annexure-H to the writ petitions).
3. The first petitioner/society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 has established a school called “National Public School” situated at Sheshadripuram, Shivamogga. It is contended that about 1167 students are studying from LKG to 10th Standard. The first petitioner/society has been running about 20 school buses of its own to facilitate the students from various parts of the city to attend the classes in the school situated at Sheshadripuram, Shivamogga. The buses while coming to the school from different places, will have to pass through 5th Cross of Sheshadripuram and it is the only approach road to the school from the flyover. The road was in a very bad condition and the City Corporation had not made any efforts to improve the road or to repair the drainage, due to which, there used to be heavy traffic jams on the said 5th Cross road. The first petitioner has voluntarily agreed to repair the road and the drainage situated on the 5th cross at its own costs, after obtaining the permission from the Shivamogga Mahanagara Palike. That being the situation, in the proceedings held on 23.09.2015, the first respondent decided to permit limited number of buses to ply on the 5th cross road till the approach road to the school is repaired and developed. Despite, the first petitioner carried out all the necessary repairs on the road situated on the 5th Cross, on the complaints lodged by the second petitioner to the Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga and the Superintendent of Police, Shivamogga District, the first respondent has passed an order to restrict the movements of the buses belonging to the first petitioner which is in gross violation of principles of natural justice, since the said order at Annexure-H, though styled as final notice, the orders are passed directing the first petitioner to run only four buses in the said route. It is further contended that it is the obligation cast upon the petitioners to safeguard the interest of the students as much as the safety and security aspects are concerned. There is no provision under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 or under any other Statute which empowers the first respondent to place a restriction on the movement of the vehicles belonging to the owners of the vehicles on a public road. The 5th cross road is a public road controlled and managed by the City Corporation, Shivamogga and all other public transport vehicles and vehicles belonging to the private owners are permitted to ply on the said road, only the petitioners are imposed with the restrictions. The action of the first respondent in discriminating the petitioners and passing the impugned order at Annexure-H is violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the learned counsel reiterating these points, seeks for quashing the impugned notice/order at Annexure-H to the writ petitions.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1 would contend that the impugned notice dated 25.11.2016 is a final notice issued to the petitioners. The authorities shall consider the reply/objections if any filed by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after hearing the parties concerned. The petitions are premature at this stage and the same requires to be rejected.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
6. It is in the background of the facts narrated above, the respondent No.1 has issued the final notice dated 25.11.2016 (Annexure-H to the writ petition). It is pertinent to note that though it is styled as final notice, certain directions are issued to the petitioners. It is trite law that any order passed by a quasi judicial authority sans providing an opportunity to the persons involved in the matter is void ab initio, hit by principles of natural justice. Principles of natural justice is the fundamental principle, which requires to be followed by the Authorities to make the orders fair and transparent. The same not being followed by the respondent No.1, the final notice/order dated 25.11.2016 (Annexure-H to the writ petition) has to be treated as a show-cause notice and not an order and the petitioners are permitted to file reply to the said show-cause notice within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order and if such reply is filed, the same shall be considered by the respondent No.1 in accordance with law after hearing the parties concerned as expeditiously as possible, keeping in mind the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules thereof.
The writ petitions stand disposed of in terms of the above.
Sd/- JUDGE NC