The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) NO. 33926 OF 2023 Priya Ranjan Jena and others Petitioners Mr. Hrudananda Mohapatra, Advocate …. -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing Counsel (For Transport Department) CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 20.12.2023 4. 1. 2. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. Letter No. 3869 dated 4th October, 2023 (Annexure-9) issued by the R.T.O., Puri inviting applications for grant of temporary stage carriage permits on different vacant routes as mentioned in the appendix is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel submits that initially the Petitioners had made Online applications for grant of temporary permit in respect of their stage carriages for different routes on 16th February, 2022. To avail temporary stage carriage permits, the Petitioners had also purchased new vehicles. But, their Online applications were rejected on the ground that there is a time clash between the operators. Assailing the rejection of their Online applications, each of the Petitioners preferred 12 separate writ petitions before this Court and considering their grievances, all the writ petitions were disposed of by separate orders on 27th April, 2023 with the following direction: Page 1 of 6 // 2 // “6. Accordingly, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case of the Petitioner, disposes of the writ petition with a direction that in the event the Petitioner files an application before the Collector, Puri-Regional Transport Authority, Puri- Opposite Party No.3 for reconsideration of his application for grant of temporary permit for the route in question in respect of the aforesaid stage carriage, the same shall be considered in accordance with law giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned including the Petitioner.” Accordingly, the Petitioners made fresh applications for consideration as per Annexure-7 series. Their applications were taken up for consideration on 19th July, 2023 and the Collector- cum-Chairman, RTA, Puri instructed the R.T.O., Puri-Opposite Party No.4 to issue temporary permits in respect of the vehicles of the Petitioners. But, without issuing any temporary permit in favour of the Petitioners, the R.T.O., Puri proceeded to issue letter under Annexure-9 inviting applications for grant of temporary stage carriage permits. Pursuant to the said letter, different applications were submitted. It is the submission of Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioners that there is no provision under the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules to issue notice inviting application for grant of temporary permit. Temporary permit is granted awaiting grant of permanent permit. Thus, letter under Annexure-9 itself is without jurisdiction. As such, applications made pursuant to the said letter under Annexure-9 are also misconceived. It is his submission that if the applications of the Petitioners will be considered along with other operators, who have made Page 2 of 6 // 3 // applications pursuant to the letter under Annexure-9, they (the Petitioners) will be highly prejudiced. This Court while disposing of the writ petitions, as aforesaid, had never directed to consider the applications of the Petitioners by inviting applications for grant of temporary permit. Thus, the impugned letter under Annexure-9 should be set aside and a direction may be issued to the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Puri not to consider the applications submitted pursuant to the letter under Annexure-9. 4. Mr. Behera, learned Standing Counsel for Transport Department submits that for the benefit of the passengers, the letter under Annexure-9 has been issued. Pursuant to the said letter, different operators submitted their applications and they are not made parties to the writ petitions. It is further submitted that in total, 34 applications including that of the Petitioners are scheduled to be considered tomorrow, i.e. on 21st December, 2023, for grant of temporary permits in respect of the stage carriages on different routes in the district of Puri. If the contention of learned counsel for the Petitioners is accepted, the operators, who have made applications pursuant to the letter under Annexure-9, will be seriously prejudiced. It is his submission that some of the applicants have also approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) Nos.9593, 9590 and 9595 of 2023 for a direction to consider their applications pursuant to the letter under Annexure-9. This Court considering the case of the Petitioners therein has directed to consider their case along with other applicants. The Petitioners by filing application for intervention also objected to the prayer made in the said writ Page 3 of 6 // 4 // petitions. But, on consideration, this Court directed to consider their applications along with other applicants including the Petitioners. Thus, the applications for grant of temporary permit cannot be confined to the applications of the Petitioners only. He, therefore, submits that the writ petitions being devoid of any merit should be dismissed. 5. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that in 12 different writ petitions filed by the Petitioners, this Court directed that if the Petitioners submit their fresh applications for consideration of their applications for grant of temporary permit, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. Before the applications of the Petitioners could be considered, the letter under Annexure-9 was issued. The Petitioners take exception to the letter under Annexure-9. But, in the meantime, different applications have been filed pursuant to the said letter under Annexure-9. This Court while disposing of the earlier 12 writ petitions filed by the Petitioners individually, never restricted consideration of applications filed only by the Petitioners for grant of temporary permit. Although there is no provision for inviting applications for grant of temporary permit, but an operator is not precluded from submitting an application for grant of temporary permit although there is no such notice or advertisement inviting such application. Even if the letter under Annexure-9 is ignored, still the fact remains that 34 applications in total are pending before the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Puri for consideration for grant of temporary permits on different routes. The contention Page 4 of 6 // 5 // of Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel to the effect that the Petitioners have purchased new vehicles for grant of temporary permit in respect of different routes and they will be prejudiced, if their applications are considered along with others, does not hold good. Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioners also draws attention of this Court to Letter No.3869 dated 4th October, 2023 (Annexure-10) issued by the R.T.O., Puri informing the applicants that their applications for temporary permit will be placed before the RTA, Puri for consideration. It is submitted that the letter under Annexure-10 was issued pursuant to the hearing of the Petitioners on 19th July, 2023. The contention of Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioners does not appear to be correct from a reading of Annexure-10, which reflects only that information has been given to the applicants that their applications will be placed before the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Puri for consideration. Temporary permit is granted in respect of a particular route for the benefit of the passengers. Thus, the applicants/operators should be provided with a fair opportunity to have an healthy competition. As such, the contention raised by Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel that the Petitioners will be prejudiced, if their applications will be considered along with others, is a misnomer. 6. It is submitted by Mr. Behera, learned Standing Counsel for Transport Department that all the 34 applications are scheduled to be considered tomorrow, i.e. on 21st December, 2023. Page 5 of 6 // 6 // 7. In view of the discussions made above, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge bks Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BIJAY KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Dec-2023 11:12:59 Page 6 of 6