Matter remanded for fresh consideration after hearing parties and permitting relevant documents.

The four writ petitions arose from disputes concerning the grant/continuation of transport permits and the eligibility of the vehicle proposed by Krishna Transport Transconnect.

Royal Travels challenged the State Transport Appellate Tribunal’s orders dated 19.12.2025 in Revision Nos. 13/2025 and 09/2025, particularly the direction remitting the matter for reconsideration after permitting the defects in the application to be fulfilled.

The petitioners contended that the application was incomplete on the relevant date and that the Tribunal had incorrectly applied Rule 170 of the Motor Vehicles Rules and wrongly held that the proposed vehicle was less than five years old.

The State and the private respondents expressed no objection to remand for fresh adjudication.

Whether the State Transport Appellate Tribunal’s orders dated 19.12.2025 in Revision Nos. 13/2025 and 09/2025 required interference and setting aside.

Whether the matter should be remitted to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration after affording the parties an effective opportunity of hearing and permitting them to place relevant documents on record.

Whether the questions concerning the completeness of the application, the age of the vehicle, and the interpretation of Rule 170 of the Motor Vehicles Rules should be reconsidered by the competent authority.

The Court applied the principles of fair hearing, effective opportunity to present relevant material, and remand to the competent statutory authority where the matter requires reconsideration on factual and legal issues.

Rule 170 of the Motor Vehicles Rules was raised by the parties in relation to the vehicle’s eligibility and age, but the High Court did not finally interpret or decide the Rule; instead, it directed the State Transport Appellate Tribunal to reconsider the matter in accordance with law after hearing the parties and examining the relevant documents.

No separate judicial precedent was cited or relied upon.

The Court noted that the challenge involved disputed factual and legal matters concerning the completeness of the application, the age of the proposed vehicle, and the application of Rule 170.

Since the parties themselves had no objection to a fresh adjudication, and because the issues required consideration by the statutory appellate authority after hearing both sides, the Court found that the impugned orders could not be sustained in their existing form.

Rather than deciding the permit dispute on merits, the Court restored the matter to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, ensuring that both Royal Travels and Krishna Transport Transconnect would have an opportunity to produce relevant documents and make submissions.

The Tribunal was directed to afford proper hearing to the concerned petitioner and Krishna Transport Transconnect, permit both parties to place relevant documents on record, and pass an order in accordance with law.

The petitioners were directed to appear before the Tribunal on 05.10.2026, and the Tribunal was directed to decide the matters within 30 days thereafter.

All four writ petitions were accordingly disposed of.