ABDUL MATEEN versus RAM KAILASH PANDEY AND OTHERS

The State Government acting in revision under s. 64-A (Bihar Amendment) does not have power to increase the number of permits beyond the limit fixed by the Regional Transport Authority under s. 47(3). The grant of an additional permit was without jurisdiction.

Parties: Appellant: Abdul Mateen; Respondent No. 1: Ram Kailash Pandey; Respondent No. 2: Sudhakar Sharma; Respondent No. 3: Respondent No. 3
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 31 July 1962
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal by Special Leave
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Motor Vehicles Permits, Jurisdiction of Transport Authority, Revision and Appeals Under Motor Vehicles Act

Administrative Law Transport Law Motor Vehicles Permits Jurisdiction of Transport Authority Revision and Appeals Under Motor Vehicles Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2

Parties

Abdul Mateen

Appellant

Ram Kailash Pandey

Respondent No. 1

Sudhakar Sharma

Respondent No. 2

Respondent No. 3

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal by Special Leave

Legal Issues

1 Whether the State Government under s. 64-A of the Motor Vehicles Act (as amended by Bihar) can increase the number of permits beyond the limit fixed by the Regional Transport Authority under s. 47(3).

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Appeal is dismissed.
Costs awarded to respondent no. 2 (Sudhakar Sharma), as he alone supported the High Court's construction on jurisdiction.