SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pune Taximen's Consumer Co-Operative Society Limited
Vs
Regional Transport Authority, Bombay and Others
Appeal (Civil) 5022 of 2006 (Arising Out of Slp (C) No.21367 of 2004)
(Arijit Pasayat and L. S. Panta, JJ)
17.11.2006
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
Leave granted.
Appellant calls in question legality of the judgment in writ petition No. 2207
of 2004 decided on 28.9.2004 by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court.
Respondent No.5, a Society registered under the Trade Union
Act, 1926 (in short the 'Act'), and its members filed the writ petition
for a direction to the respondents to implement recommendations made by the
sub-committee appointed by Regional Transport Authority (in short the 'RTA')
(Respondent No.1). They also prayed that the respondents be directed to
implement the Resolution dated 4.2.2004 passed in a meeting under the
Chairmanship of respondent No.1-RTA. The High Court noted the undertaking given
by the Pune Taximen's Consumer Co- operative Society Ltd. (in short the 'Pune
Society'), the present appellant to shift Gala Nos.P-49 to P-52 within a period
of two weeks. It directed the RTA to ensure that Resolution No.15 dated
4.2.2004 is fully implemented. Direction was also given to ensure that the
recommendation of the sub-committee was implemented fully.
Learned counsel appearing for the Pune Society-present appellant had submitted
before the High Court that their appeal was pending before the State Transport
Appellate Tribunal (in short the 'STAT').
By the impugned order, the High Court directed the STAT to dispose of the
appeal as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from the
date of order. It was stated that the shifting of appellant-Pune Society
(Respondent No. 5 before the High Court) to the Gala would be without prejudice
to the rights and contentions in the appeal pending before the STAT.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court was totally
confused about the issues and the reliefs sought for. The appeal then pending
before STAT had nothing to do with the issues involved. Though the Brihan
Mumbai Mahanagar Palika (in short 'Mahanagar Palika') was a party before the
High Court, it is not clear as to whether the Gala nos. P-49 to P-52 have been
handed over. The so-called concession is without instruction and even otherwise
the writ petition could not have been disposed of in the manner done. Even the
basic grievances and respective stand have not been discussed.
It appears that the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Pune Society
stated by way of an undertaking before the High Court that shifting to Gala
P-49 to P-52 shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of order.
On 25.10.2004 on the basis of the statement made by learned counsel appearing
for the appellant, it was observed that the question as to what would happen
when Gala was made available to the appellant shall be considered in this
appeal. The statement of respondent No.5 (present appellant) that shifting
shall be done to Gala P-49 to P-52 within a period of two weeks was really of
not much relevance.
The High Court's order seems to be totally confusing. The undertaking by
learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 to act within a particular time
was really, as noted above, has no relevance The Gala Nos. P-49 to P-52 were,
according to appellant, to be given by the Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation.
It is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that Gala Nos.14 to 18 and A2
were to be first allotted by the Mahanagar Palika. The members of the
appellant-society had not been given the galas though according to it all
conditions were fulfilled.
Learned counsel for the State supported the order of the High Court stating
that the appellant had been given necessary protection.
It is to be further noted that the dispute before the STAT was totally
unconnected with the subject matter of dispute in the writ petition. As the
High Court's order is totally confusing and even does not indicate any reason
for arriving at various conclusions, it would be appropriate for the High Court
to re- hear the matter. It shall consider the respective stand of the parties
and pass necessary orders.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.