High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Dharam Singh vs State Transport Appellate … on 5 March, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dharam Singh vs State Transport Appellate … on 5 March, 2009
      IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
                  HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


                                      CWP No.3823 of 2009
                                      Date of decision: March 5, 2009.


Dharam Singh
                                                           ...Petitioner(s)

            v.

State Transport Appellate Tribunal & anr.

                                                           ...Respondent(s)


CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT


1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:    Shri P.S. Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                  ORDER

Surya Kant, J. – (Oral):

Notice of motion.

On the asking of the court, Shri G.S. Attariwala, learned

Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the

respondents.

In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is

no necessity to seek counter affidavit from the respondents.

The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 23.10.2008

passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal,

while rejecting the petitioner’s appeal, has refused to take into consideration

various documents which the petitioner had placed on record of the appeal.

Suffice it to note here that the petitioner applied for renewal of
regular stage carriage permit for running his bus on Malerkotla – Amritsar

route with one return trip also. Under section 81(4)(b) of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988, the petitioner was required to supply the following

documents along with his application:-

1. No objection certificate from the concerned officer.

2. A certificate, as envisaged under Section 81(4)(b) of the

Act from the concerned District Transport Officer.

3. A certificate of fitness of the vehicle, duly verified by

the Motor Vehicles Inspector.

4. Upto date Tax Clearance Certificate from the concerned

District Transport Officer.

The petitioner failed to attach these documents and his

application for renewal of the permit was accordingly rejected by the

competent authority. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before

the Tribunal. Along with the appeal, the petitioner appended the requisite

documents but the Tribunal has refused to look into the same on the premise

that these documents same ought to have been appended with the

application for renewal of the permit.

Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of

the impugned order passed by the appellate Tribunal, I am of the considered

view that the same cannot sustain in law. The documents attached along

with the appeal, at the best, could be taken as a prayer to lead additional

evidence. The Tribunal could also remand the case to the Regional

Transport Authority for fresh adjudication.

For the reasons afore-stated, the orders passed by the appellate

Tribunal as well as the RTA are set aside with liberty to the petitioner to

move a fresh application before the RTA along with requisite documents. If
any such application is moved by the petitioner, the RTA shall consider and

dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law.





March 10, 2009.                                   [ Surya Kant ]
kadyan                                                 Judge