http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: KUNDUR RUDRAPPA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE MYSORE REVENUE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT31/07/1975

BENCH: UNTWALIA, N.L. BENCH: UNTWALIA, N.L. GOSWAMI, P.K. ALAGIRISWAMI, A. GOSWAMI, P.K. FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

CITATION:  1975 AIR 1807            1975 SCC  (2) 590  CITATOR INFO :  F          1976 SC 734  (2)

ACT:      Motor Vehicles  Act, 1939, s. 64 order granting permit- Issue of permit in pursuance of the order-If appealable.

HEADNOTE:      The appellant  was granted  a stage  carriage permit by the Regional  Transport  Authority  in  May,  1963.  Appeals against the  grant to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and further appeals to the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal were dismissed. Thereafter, in April, 1967, the Secretary of the Regional  Transport Authority  after  calling  upon  the appellant to  produce the  relevant  documents,  issued  the permit. Appeals  by the  respondents of  the State Transport Appellate Tribunal  against the  issue of  the permit to the appellant were  allowed on  the ground  of  limitation.  The appeal of  the appellant  to the  Revenue Appellate Tribunal was dismissed.  The appellant’s  writ petition  to the  High Court was also dismissed.      Allowing the appeal to this Court, ^      HELD: There  was a   clear error of jurisdiction on the part of  the State  Transport  Appellate  Tribunal  and  the Revenue Appellate  Tribunal in interfering with the issue of permit to  the appellant. The High Court was, therefore, not right in dismissing the writ application. [190D-E]      Appeal is  a creature of the statute. Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles  Act, 1939,  is  the  only  section  creating rights of  appeal against  the grant  of  permit  and  other matters. But  there is  no appeal  provided against an order issuing a  permit in  pursuance of  an  order  granting  the permit. Issuance  of the  permit is  only a  ministerial act necessarily following  the grant  of the  permit. Hence, the appeal to  the State  Transport Appellate  Tribunal and  the further appeal are not competent under the section. [190B-D]

JUDGMENT:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

    CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal No. 481 of 1973.      From the Judgment and order dated the 9th February 1973 of the  Mysore High  Court at  Bangalore in W.P. No. 1922 of 1970.      H. B. Datar and K. N. Bhat, for the appellant.      S. S.  Javali and B. P. Singh, for the respondents Nos. 1, 3-13      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      GOSWAMI, J.  This appeal  by special  leave is directed against the  judgment of  the Mysore  High Court  (now  High Court of  Karnataka) of  February  9"  1973,  rejecting  the appellant’s  writ   petition  under   article  226   of  the Constitution by  which the  orders of  the  State  Transport Appellate Tribunal and the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal had been challenged. 189      Briefly the facts are as follows :-      The appellant was granted a stage carriage permit under section 48 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (briefly the Act) for the  route Devenagere  to Shimoga  via  Honnali  by  the Regional Transport  Authority, Shimoga,  by its  order dated May 3/4,  1963. Some  of the  respondents preferred  appeals against the  said order  to the  State   Transport Appellate Tribunal and  obtained stay  of the  order The appeals were, however, dismissed on September 27, 1963. Again, some of the respondents preferred  further appeals to the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal  against the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.  This time also the appeals met with the same fate  and were  dismissed  on  February  27,  1967.  It appears, however,  that   c no  order of stay was granted by the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal.      On April  25,  1967,  the  Secretary  to  the  Regional Transport Authority,  Shimoga, called  upon the appellant to produce  the  relevant  documents  and  the  certificate  of registration for  making necessary  entry in the permit. The appellant produced  the same  on April  26,  1967,  and  the permit was  issued on the same day. Against the order of the issue of  the permit,  respondents 4 to 13 preferred appeals to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal on the ground that the Secretary  to the Regional Transport Authority, Shimoga, had no  jurisdiction to issue a permit under rule 119 of the Mysore Motor  Vehicles Rules, 1963 (briefly the Rules) after a lapse  of such  a long  time from the date of the grant of the permit.  It was  contended that  the issue of the permit was made  beyond the  prescribed period  of limitation under rule 119.  It may be mentioned that at the time of the grant of the  permit the  Mysore Motor  Vehicles Rules,  1945 (old Rules) were  in force  and rule  151 of  the old  Rules  was replaced by  rule 119  with effect from July 1, 1963. It was contended by  the appellant before the appellate authorities that there was no period of limitation under rule 151 of the old Rules,  which was  applicable to his case, for the issue of a  permit. The appeals of the respondents were allowed by the  State  Transport  Appellate  Tribunal  by  majority  on January  29,  1969.  The  District  Judge  Member,  however, dissented. An  appeal filed  by the appellant to the Revenue Appellate Tribunal  against the order of the State Transport Appellate  Tribunal   was  dismissed   which  led   to   the unsuccessful writ  application in  the High  Court and hence this appeal.      The point  that arises for consideration is whether any appeal lay  under  section  64  of  the  Act  to  the  State Transport Appellate  Tribunal against  the issue of a permit in pursuance  of  an  earlier  resolution  of  the  Regional

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

Transport  Authority   granting  the   permit.  It  is  only necessary to  read section  64(1) (a)  which is material for the purpose of this appeal:           64(11 (a): "Any person aggrieved by the refusal of      the State  or a Regional Transport Authority to grant a      permit, or  by  any  condition  attached  to  a  permit      granted to  him may  within the  prescribed time and in      the prescribed man- 190      ner, appeal  to the  State Transport Appellate Tribunal      constituted under  sub-section (2),  who  shall,  after      giving  such  person  and  the  original  authority  an      opportunity of  being heard,  give a  decision  thereon      which shall be final". We are not required to consider the other clauses of section 64(1) which  are admittedly  not relevant. Section 64 has to be read  with rule  178 of  the Rules  which prescribes  the procedure for appeal to the various authorities      Appeal is  a creature  of  the  statute.  There  is  no dispute that  section 64  of the  Act is  the  only  section creating rights  of appeal  against the  grant of permit and other matters with which we are not concerned here. There is no appeal  provided for  under section  64 against  an order issuing a  permit in  pursuance of  the order  granting  the permit. Issuance  of the  permit is  only a  ministerial act necessarily following  the grant  of the permit. The appeals before  the  State  Transport  Appellate  Tribunal  and  the further appeal to the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal are, therefore, not  competent under  section 64  of the  Act and both the  Tribunals had  no jurisdiction  to  entertain  the appeals and  to interfere  with the  order of  the  Regional Transport Authority  granting the  permit which  had already been affirmed  in appeal  by the  State Transport  Appellate Tribunal and  further in second appeal by the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal.  There was,  therefore, a clear error of jurisdiction  on   the  part   of  both   the  Tribunals  in interfering with  the grant  of the permit to the appellant. The High  Court was,  therefore, not right in dismissing the writ application  of the  appellant which ought to have been allowed.      Although  arguments  were  addressed  by  counsel  with regard to  old rule  151 and  rule 119  of the  Mysore Motor Vehicles Rules, 1963 we do not feel called upon to pronounce upon the legal effect of these rules in this appeal.      In the  result the  appeal is allowed. The order of the High Court  is set  aside and  necessarily the  order of the State Transport  Appellate. Tribunal of January 29, 1969 and the order of the Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal of May 8, 1970, also  fall. The  order  granting  the  permit  to  the appellant stands restored There will be no order as to costs . V.P.S.                                       Appeal allowed. 191