JUDGMENT 1. THE order dated 25th January, 1983 passed by Sri M. R. Mallick, presiding Officer, State Transport Appellate tribunal, West Bengal, in Appeal No. 95 of 1982 is the subject-matter of challenge in the two writ petitions which I have analogoously heard. 2. ON 8th April, 1982, the- Regional Transport Authority, calcutta Region had resolved to issue contract carriage permits far plying three wheeler Auto Rickshaws in that city of Calcutta bounded by Vivekananda bridge on the north-west, Dunlop Bridge on the north, Dum Dum Airport on the East, garia and the northern portion of Diamond harbour Road, Thakurpukur on the south and Howrah Railway Station on the west. Oh 12th March, 1982, the Secretary, Regional transport Authority, Calcutta Region published in the newspapers notices stating that the Calcutta Regional Transport Authority, proposed to grant under section 51 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, Contract carriage Permits for three wheelers Auto rickshaws in the aforesaid area. Total number of such permits to be issued was stated to be two thousand. The Secretary to the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta Region also purported to invite, objections against the said proposal in terms of section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 from interested persons and fixed 26th April, 1982 as the last date for submission of such objections. On 22nd April, 1982 the Bengal Taxi Association; and this who are the petitioner no. 1 in Civil Rule No. 4882 (W) of 1982 submitted representation against the said proposed grant of permits for Auto Rickshaws. Five other representations were submitted against the said proposal for granting Contract Carriage Permits for Auto Rickshaws in Calcutta. On 28th April, 1932, the Regional transport Authority, Calcutta Region, purported to over-rule the said representations including the one filed by the Bengal Taxi association and authorised the Secretary, regional Transport Authority to invite applications for grant of two thousand permanent contract carriage permits for three wheeler Auto Rickshaws. Being aggrieved by the said resolution of the Regional transport Authority, Calcutta Region, dated 28th April, 1982, rejecting their representation against proposal to grant contract carriage permits for Auto rickshaws, the Bengal Taxi Association and six others, who were the members and operators of the said Association, preferred, under section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, S. T. A. Appeal No. 95 of 1982, before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, West Bengal. 3. MR. 3. MR. M. R. Mallick, learned Presiding officer, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, by his order dated 25th January, 1983, allowed the said appeal in part and modified the resolution of the Regional Transport authority dated 28th April, 1982 by directing that the said Authority shall issue 500 permanent contract carriage permits for three wheeler Auto Rickshaws for plying in the city of Calcutta except in the Howrah station area. Barabazar area (Strand Road)and Dalhousie Square area, The learned presiding officer of the Tribunal also gave liberty to the members of the Regional transport Authority to issue further permits for Auto Rickshaws, if, after reviewing the position after one year from the date of the issue of the said 500 permits, the Regional transport Authority would feel that such further Auto Rickshaw permits would be necessary and desirable then in the interests of the public, then after complying with the provisions of section 50 of the Motor vehicles Act, 1939 grant of such additional permits shall also have to be made in a phased manner after reviewing the position every year. 4. BOTH the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta Region and the Bengal Taxi ASSOB ciation and others who had preferred the aforesaid appeal, under section 64 of the motor Vehicles Act, 1939 are aggrieved by the Appellate Tribunal's order dated 25th January, 1983 although not for identical reasons. Mr. Somendra Chandra Bose, advocate, who has appeared on behalf of the petitioners in Civil Rule No. 4882 (w) of 1983, has, inter-alia, submitted that the regional Transport Authority had acted contrary to the procedure laid down in the motor Vehicles Act, 1939 for considering applications for contract carriage permits and for disposal of representation made against grant of such permits. According to Mr. Bose, the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta Region, did not apply its own independent judgment or the question of issue of Contract Carriage permits for plying Auto-Rickshaws in the city of Calcutta but had allowed itself to be guided by the decision made by others. Mr. Bose further submitted that although on 8th April 1982 the Regional Transport authority itself did not pass any resolution fixing the total number of Contract Carriage permits to be issued for Auto Rickshaws, the Secretary of the said Authority had purported to publish a notification that two thousand Auto Rickshaw permits were proposed to be issued. Mr. Mr. Bose further submitted that although on 8th April 1982 the Regional Transport authority itself did not pass any resolution fixing the total number of Contract Carriage permits to be issued for Auto Rickshaws, the Secretary of the said Authority had purported to publish a notification that two thousand Auto Rickshaw permits were proposed to be issued. Mr. Bose has again submitted that there were other patent illegalities in the proceedings of the regional Transport Authority- and, therefore, the State transport Appellate Tribunal ought to have set aside the resolutions passed by the Regional Transport Authority and remitted the matter back to the Regional Transport Authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law the question of grant of Contract Carriage permits for plying Auto Rickshaws. Mr. Bose has further submitted that the State Transport appellate Tribunal had committed errors of procedure by inviting the Commissioner of police, Calcutta to file a statement at the appellate stage. Mr. Bose has also submitted that the learned Tribunal did not consider the objection raised on behalf of his clients to receiving additional materials at the appellate stage. Mr. Tapas Roy, appearing on behalf of the Regional Transport Authority calcutta, and the State of West Bengal, has submitted that the scope of the afore? said appeal before the State Transport appellate Tribunal was limited only to the question whether the number of corttract carriages for which permits had been previously granted were sufficient for or in excess of the needs of the Calcutta Region. According to Mr. Roy, the learned Tribunal having found that the number of existing contract carriages were totally inadequate for the needs of the travelling public of calcutta, it should have dismissed the appeal preferred by the Bengal Taxi association and others against rejection of their representations made under section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 by the regional Transport Authority, Calcutta ' Region. Mr. Roy has further submitted that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to limit the number of permits to be issued for auto Rickshaws or to direct that such auto Rickshaws shall not be allowed to ply in certain parts of- Calcutta singe it was not within the competence of the Appellate tribunal to enter into any question other than whether the Contract Carriage Permits already granted were sufficient for calcutta area. 5. 5. HAVING failed to promptly obtain the certified copies of the resolution dated 28th April, 1982 passed by the Regional Transport Authority, the Bengal taxi Association had previously moved this court under Article 226 of the constitution. On 10th September, 1982, B. C. Ray, J., after hearing both parties had disposed of the Rule issued upon the said previous writ application filed by the Bengal Taxi Association. The learned Judge had directed -the respondents to supply the certified copy of the said resolution dated 28th April, 1982 within 7 days and also granted liberty to the petitioners to prefer an appeal under section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act., B. C. Ray, J., also gave directions for expeditionsly disposing of the said appeal. Thereafter, having obtained the certified copy of the said resolution, Bengal taxi Association and others had presented state Transport Tribunal Appeal no. 95 of 1982. 6. AT the outset, I may record, that, on behalf of the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta Region, original resolutions dated 8th April, 1982 and 28th april, 1982 signed by the Chairman of the said Authority were produced before me. I accept the explanation that the said resolutions have not been as yet posted in the bound Minute Books of the Authority and the certified copies of the said resolutions obtained by the bengal Taxi Association are true copies thereof. The records of the said appeal have been also placed before me. I find no substance in the submission that in considering the question of granting Contract carriage Permits for three- wheeler Auto Rickshaws the Regional transport Authority, Calcutta Region, did not itself consider whether additional contract carriages were necessary or desirable in public interest and whether the number of contract carriages for which permits had been already granted were sufficient or in excess of the needs of the area, The State Transport appellate Tribunal in its order had recorded that it had directed the authorised representative of the Regional Transport authority to produce documents in support of the observations made in the resolution dated 28th April, 1982 that there had been consultation with the Traffic authorities, Calcutta. Pursuant to the same, the Regional Transport Authority had produced the letter dated 5th April, 1982 of the Director, Public Vehicles department and also the letter dated 12th April, 1982 written by the Commissioner of Police Calcutta. Pursuant to the same, the Regional Transport Authority had produced the letter dated 5th April, 1982 of the Director, Public Vehicles department and also the letter dated 12th April, 1982 written by the Commissioner of Police Calcutta. It would appear therefrom that some discussions were held in the chamber of the, Minister-in-Charge of Transport regarding introduction of three wheeler Auto Rickshaws in the city of Calcutta and the Commissioner of Police, calcutta appeared to have raised no objection to its introduction and he had cenfirmed by his said letter dated 12th April, 1982 that Auto Rickshaws might be allowed to ply freely all over the city like taxis instead of keeping them confined to the specified routes in the fringe areas. Merely because such a disussion was held regarding introducion of Auto Rickshaws in the Calcutta area, same could not affect the validity of the taken by the Regional Transport Authority to act and proceed in terms of section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. There is no material that because of such discussion in the Minister's chamber on 5th April, 1982 the Regional transport Authority's views were overborne or that the said Authority had acted mechanically and without any regard to the matters which were relevant under section 50 of the said Act. The supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Police vs. Gordhandas Bhanji A. I. R. 1952 S. C. 16 (at page 18, paragraphs 5 and 6) had rejected a somewhat similar argument that the Cinema advisory Committee and not the Commissioner of Police, Bombay had decided that the site for the proposed cinema house should be rejected. The court had observed that the recommendations of the Advisory Committee might have weighed with the Commissioner but there was nothing to indicate that the decision was not that of the Commissioner himself given in bonafide exercise of the discretion vested in him. I also hold that before exercising its powers under section 50 of the Act the Regional Transport authority was entitled to consider the advice and/or recommendations regarding introduction of Auto Rickshaws in the streets of Calcutta and,to reach its own decision bonafide. 7. IN the instant case, the Regional transport Authority did not follow the different stages of the procedure strictly in the sequence indicated in sections 49 and 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. 7. IN the instant case, the Regional transport Authority did not follow the different stages of the procedure strictly in the sequence indicated in sections 49 and 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. After an application under section 49 of the Act is made, the Regional Transport authority is required to follow the procedure prescribed by section 50 of the act while considering such an application for contract carriage permit. In the instant case, the Regional Transport authority at their meeting held on 8th" April, 1982 resolved that it was necessary and desirable, to issue Contract Carriage permits to fill the vacuum caused by seizure of a large number of unlicensed rickshaws and restriction on movement of the said slow moving mode of transport in some areas. The Regional transport Authority had also referred to traffic congestion and general non-availability of taxis in the city of Calcutta. Therefore, the Regional Transport Authority had resolved that representations be invited from persons holding Contract carriage Permits, the Local authority and of the Police Authority fixing 28th April, 1982 as the last date for submission of such representations. 8. THE learned advocate for the petitioner has not himself argued that only by reason of such deviation from the prescribed procedure the merits of the decision of the Regional Transport Authority was affected or that persons already holding Contract Carriage Permits were in any way prejudiced in making representations in terms of section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. They have availed of such opportunity by filing representations. After the same was rejected by the Regional Transport Authority at its meeting held on 28th April, 1982, they had preferred appeals which has been since decided on merits. In considering applications for contract Carriage Permits, the Regional Transport Authority is required under section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 to "have regard to the extent to which additional contract carriages may be necessary or desirable in the public interest". The aforesaid expression indicates that in the above matter the Regional Transport Authority would consider, i. e. take into account whether additional contract carriages were necessary or desirable in the public interest. The regional Transport Authority shall also take into consideration representations made by, (i.) persons already holding contract, carriage permits in the region or area, (ii) any local authority and (iii)Police Authority. The regional Transport Authority shall also take into consideration representations made by, (i.) persons already holding contract, carriage permits in the region or area, (ii) any local authority and (iii)Police Authority. The latter part of section 50 of the said Act not only specifies xvho may make representations but also indicates the scope of such representation, if any, by laving down "to the effect that the number of contract carriages for which permits have already been granted is sufficient for or in excess of the needs of the region or any area". Thus the said words "to the effect" show that by filing the said representations, only the issue regarding the sufficiency of existing contract carriages may be raised. 9. MR. Bose, appearing on behalf of the Bengal Taxi Association, has drawn my attention to the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Rameshwar Prasad etc. etc. v. State of U- P. and others a. I. R. 1983 S. C. 383, which considered the expression 'public interest' in the context of section 43a (U. P. Amendment) and section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. According to the learned judges the expression 'public interest' takes within its fold several factors such as maximum number of permits which may be issued on a route or area having regard to the needs and convenience of the travelling public, the non-availability of sufficient number of -stage carriage services in other routes or areas, the problem of law and order, the condition of roads and bridges on the routes, uneconomic running of stage carriage services leading to elimination of small operators and employment of more capital than necessary in any sector leading to starvation of capital investment in other sectors etc. In considering an application for contract carriage permit a Regional Transport Authority ought to take into consideration all these various facets of public -interest but person who makes a representation may do so in respect of sufficiency or otherwise of existing contract carriages which is only one out of the many face is of the concept 'public interest'. 10. THE Bengal Taxi "association in their representation filed before the regional Transport Authority had raised several other aspects of 'public interest' by contending that the contract carriage permit holders for taxi cabs would be economically adversely affected and that the grant for permits for Auto Rickshaws would create traffic problems. 10. THE Bengal Taxi "association in their representation filed before the regional Transport Authority had raised several other aspects of 'public interest' by contending that the contract carriage permit holders for taxi cabs would be economically adversely affected and that the grant for permits for Auto Rickshaws would create traffic problems. On 28th April, 1982 while rejecting the representations of the Bengal Taxi Association and also of other persons, the Regional transport Authority had recorded that the proposal for grant of Contract Carriage Permits for Auto Rickshaws had been made with a view to provide cheap transport facility to the people of Calcutta keeping in mind general declining trend in taxis and ever increasing complaints about their nonavailability. The regional Transport Authority had also referred to the withdrawal of a large number of unlicensed hand-pulled Rickshaws from the streets of Calcutta. According to the Regional Transport Authority, the Auto Riskshaws were expected to fill up the vacum created by decrease in the number of taxis and of hand pulled riskshaws. The Regional Transport authority had recorded that six thousand and odd number of contract carriage permits for taxi cabs were too inadequate to provide adequate service to the travelling public. The Regional Transport Authority had also mentioned that introduction of two thousand Auto Rickshaws in the city would not lead to any appreciable change in the air and noise pollution level of the city. Being aggrieved, by the rejection of their representations filed under section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 the Bengal Taxi Association and six others had preferred S. T. A. Appeal No. 95 of 1982 under section 64 (1) (f) of the said Act. The said clause (f) of section 64 (1) has conferred such right of appeal only upon the Local Authority, Police Authority and a person or an association who provides transport facilities and who had opposed grant of permit and is aggrieved by the grant thereof, therefore, the West Bengal State Transport Appellate Tribunal was strictly not entitled to add All Bengal Rickshaw union as a respondent in the said appeal because such hand-pulled rickshaws were not contract carriages and association of persons pulling such rickshaws had no right either to make representation under section 50 or to file any appeal under section 64 (1) (f) of the Motor vehicles Act, 1939. For the same reason the Appellate Tribunal was not entitled to consider the view point of All Bengal rickshaws Association regarding introduction of Auto Rickshaws in the city of calcutta. 11. IN my view, the scope of an appeal under section 64 (1) (f) of the Motor vehicles Act is substantially same as the scope of representation which may be made under section 50 of the said Act. I have already indicated that persons specified in section 50 of the Act may file representations to the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta Region on 'the question whether the existing number ad contract carriages in the region or area were sufficient or in excess of the needs of the region. Therefore, in an appeal preferred, against rejection of such representations, the Appellate Tribunal under section 64 (1) is required to decide whether the number of contract carriages for which permits had been already granted were sufficient or not. The other aspects of public interest Would; not be within the scope of a representation under; Section 50 of the Motor vehicles Act and, therefore, the Tribunal under section 64 of the Act cannot decide whether the Regional Transport authority had given anyregard to the extent to which additional contract carriages may be necessary or desirable from other aspects of public interest. 12. IT is settled law that the right of appeal is a creaiure of statute anu that-unless tne statute wnich creates such right of appeal imposes limitations, the appellate authority has generally the same powers and perform as nearly, as may be, same duties as are conferred or imposed on the original authority from whose order the appeal is preferred. Therefore, it has been held that an appeal is a continuation of the suit or original proceeding. It amounts to re-hearing subject to any statutory curtailment of the scope of an appeal (see Chappan vs. Moidin Kutti I. L. B. J[1899 ). 22 Madras 68, (FB) Ghansham Singh v. Bhola singh, A. I. R. 1923 Allahabad 490, The state o/ Kerala v. K. M. Charia Abdulla and Co. A. I. R. 1965 S. C. 1585 ). The Bengal Taxi Association had urged before the Regional Transport Authority and the Appellate Tribunal that persons plying contract carriage taxi cabs would be economically hard-hit in case of contract; carriage permits for three wheeler Auto Rickshaws be granted. A. I. R. 1965 S. C. 1585 ). The Bengal Taxi Association had urged before the Regional Transport Authority and the Appellate Tribunal that persons plying contract carriage taxi cabs would be economically hard-hit in case of contract; carriage permits for three wheeler Auto Rickshaws be granted. Such question of possible economic hardship to holders of existing contract carriage were" relevant only to the extent the same was connected with the question whether the existing number of taxi cabs were sufficient for the needs of Calcutta area. Both the Regional Transport Authority and the Appellate Tribunal rejected the said contention. It has been concurrently found both by the Regional transport Authority and the Appellate tribunal that existing number of taxi cabs were not sufficient to cater to the needs of the commuters and there was necessity for increasing the transport fleet in the city. The Tribunal considered at ienght the submission made on behalf of the Calcutta Police that about 12 thousand unlicensed handpuiled rickshaws had been seized and there were still 6 thousand unlicensed hand-pulied rickshaws and another 6 thousand licensed rickshaws in the city of Calcutta. According to the Police Authorities, they had been receiving a large number of complaints about unsatisfactory services rendered by taxi cabs. Because of the' rise in the taxi fare, many could not afford to hire taxi cabs. The police authorities disclosed the number of cases instituted in the year 1981-82 against a large number of taxi drivers for their refusal to go on hire. According to the police authorities, the actual number of such cases were much higher because harassed people did not always report to the police. According to the Tribunal, the taxis were insufficient to cope with the demand of the public wishing to travel short distances and inside narrower streets and lanes in the city of Calcutta. 13. ALTHOUGH the Appellate Tribunal did not differ from the finding of the regional Transport Authority, Calcutta region that the existing contract carriage permits for taxi cabs were not sufficient for the needs of the Calcutta area and that the Contract Carriage Permits be granted for Auto Rickshaws, the Tribunal has directed introduction of, such Auto Rickshaws in a phased manner. ALTHOUGH the Appellate Tribunal did not differ from the finding of the regional Transport Authority, Calcutta region that the existing contract carriage permits for taxi cabs were not sufficient for the needs of the Calcutta area and that the Contract Carriage Permits be granted for Auto Rickshaws, the Tribunal has directed introduction of, such Auto Rickshaws in a phased manner. The tribunal had given such directions because of its view that in the present difficult condition in the city the introduction of two thousand Auto Rickshaws at one time would aggravate the traffic problem in Calcutta. The Tribunal had thus partially upheld the representation made by the Bengal Taxi Association that introduction of two thousand Auto Rickshaws in the city would creat traffic hazards. According to the Appellate Tribunal, it was not clear who had taken the decision of fixing the number of Auto " Rickshaws at two thousand. 14. I have already indicated the scope of an appeal preferred under section 64 (1) (i) or the Motor Vehicles Act by a person or authority against rejection of his representation made under section 50 of the Act. The Tribunal in such an appeal is primarily concerned with the question whether the Regional Transport authority had rightly rejected the appellant's representation to the effect that number of existing contract carriages in the region or area were sufficient or in excess of the needs of the area. Such a question was one out of the myriad aspects of public interest which in its comprehensive sense includes many questions, all of them, however, do not come within the scope of a representation which may be made under section 50 of, the Motor Vehicles Act. Such a question was one out of the myriad aspects of public interest which in its comprehensive sense includes many questions, all of them, however, do not come within the scope of a representation which may be made under section 50 of, the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, the, condition of Calcutta roads and the possibility of traffic hazards and congestions which may be caused by granting contract carriage permits for Auto Rickshaws may be relevant for a decision by the Regional Transport Authority as to what extent additional contract carriages were necessary or desirable in the public interest; but in view of the limited scope of an appeal preferred under section 6 (1) (f) of the Act the Appellate tribunal may not sit in appeal from the decision of the Regional Transport authority made under section 50 of the motor Vehicles Act save and except as, to whether the number of existing contract carriages were sufficient for or in excess of the needs of the region or area. Accordingly, it was not within the Appellate tribunal's jurisdiction to give unsections for introducing Auto Rickshaws in the city of Calcutta in a phased manner. But since the Bengal Taxi Association and six others have tiled this writ application challenging both the resolutions dated 8th April, 1982 and 28th April, 1982 passed by the Regional Transport Authority and also the Appellate tribunal's decision, it is open to the said petitioners to impugn before me the validity of the aforesaid two resolutions of the Regional Transport Authority on the ground that the same was not in. accordance with section 50 of the act. Accordingly, it is no longer very material that all aspects of public interest within the meaning of section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act could not have been, agitated in an appeal preferred under section 64 (1) (f) of the said Act. I may now proceed to consider in this writ application at the instance of the, Bengal Taxi Association and others whether the Regional Transport Authority had acted after taking into account various aspects of the question as to whether additional contract carriages are necessary or desirable in the public interest. It was incumbent upon the Regional Transport Authority to apply its mind to matters which are relevant for considering whether it may be necessary or desirable to grant contract carriage permits for three wheeler Auto Rickshaws. 15. It was incumbent upon the Regional Transport Authority to apply its mind to matters which are relevant for considering whether it may be necessary or desirable to grant contract carriage permits for three wheeler Auto Rickshaws. 15. IN view of the concurrent findings of fact made by the Regional Transport authority, Calcutta Region and the Appellate Tribunal, i am not prepared to allow the Bengal Taxi Association and its members to again contend that the existing number of contract carriages in the city or Calcutta were sufficient. Again it was a matter of executive policy whether three wheeler Auto Rickshaws ought to be allowed to ply in the city of Calcutta. Reasons recorded in the resolution dated 8th and 28th April 1982 passed by the Regional Transport Authority were germane to public interest. Therefore, I cannot interfere with the regional Transport Authority's decision to introduce three wheeler Auto Rickshaws in the Calcutta area. 16. I have already mentioned that the appellate Tribunal has observed that there was no indication that there had been any proper assessment by survey before fixing the number of Auto Rickshaws permits to be issued. Before me the Regional Transport Authority neither in its writ application nor in. the affidavit in-opposition filed against the writ application of the Bengal Taxi Association and others had disclosed any new material in addition to those produced at the hearing of the appeal under section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act. I have already mentioned about the meeting held in the chamber of the Minister-in-Charge, Government of west Bengal on 5th April, 1982, immediately prior to the Regional Transport authority, Calcutta Region which had resolved on 8th April, 1982 to invite objections against granting of stage carriage permits for Auto Rickshaws. On 8th. April, 1982 while the Regional Transport; authority, Calcutta Region had recorded its reasons for doing so, it did no1; fix the total number of permits to be granted for Auto Rickshaws. Without any resolution in his behalf, the secretary of the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta Region had purported to mention in the notice inviting such objections that two thousand permits to auto Rickshaws were proposed to be granted. The Secretary of the Regional transport Authority, Calcutta Region on his own was not entitled to fix the number of permits proposed to be issued. The Secretary of the Regional transport Authority, Calcutta Region on his own was not entitled to fix the number of permits proposed to be issued. The Regional Transport Authority Calcutta region at their meeting held on 28th April, 1982 while disposing of the representations preferred by the Bengal taxi Association and six others had for the first time mentioned that two thousand auto Rickshaw permits were proposed to be granted. Thereafter, on 5th May, 1982 the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta Region had issued advertisements stating that approximately two thousand Auto Riskahaws permits would be granted. In my view, the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta Region ought to be directed to again consider the said question in accordance with law and then fix the total number of permits to be issued for plying Auto Rickshaws in the streets of Calcutta. I do not find that before fixing the number of such Contract Carriage Permits for Auto Rickshaws, the Regional Transport Authority had given regard to the extent to which the said additional contract carriages were necessary and desirable in public interest particularly in the context of condition of Calcutta streets and the volume of existing traffic, specially, in the congested parts of the city. I am not unmindful of the fact that both the Regional Transport Authority and the Police Authority had mentioned" about the alleged vacuum caused by seizure of unlicensed riskshaws and. by the ban imposed on the plying of licensed hand-pulled rickshaws in some of the streets of Calcutta. There is some force in the contention that before fixing the number of permits for Auto Rickshaws no traffic survey was undertaken. Secondly, the respondents have not disclosed the reasons which had prompted the regional Transport Authority to limit to the fringe areas of the city of Calcutta the plying of Auto Rickshaws in respect of which Contract Carriage Permits had been previously granted. I am not aware whether the grounds still exist or not. Thus, reasons are not forthcoming why such restrictions were imposed previously on auto Rickshaws for which permits were granted earlier, while it is proposed to at once grant two thousand new permits for Auto Rickshaws for plying them through the Calcutta area. 17. I am not aware whether the grounds still exist or not. Thus, reasons are not forthcoming why such restrictions were imposed previously on auto Rickshaws for which permits were granted earlier, while it is proposed to at once grant two thousand new permits for Auto Rickshaws for plying them through the Calcutta area. 17. CALCUTTA Auto Rickshaws Association claiming to represent Auto Rickshaws operators who had been earlier granted such permits for restricted areas applied for adding them as respondents in Civil Rule No. 4882 (W) of 1983, obtained by the Bengal Taxi Association and six others. They prayed that they may be allowed to make submission on the point of equal treatment for all Auto rickshaw permit holders and for directing the regional Transport Authority to enlarge the area for plying auto Rickshaws which were earlier granted contract Carriage Permits. I do not propose to allow the said application for addition of party or to decide the claims and contentions raised on behalf of the holders of existing Contract Csrriape Permits for Auto Rickshaws. It is onen to them, if they are so advised, to file a separate writ application or to seek any other remedy for redress of their alleged grievances. 18. BEFORE I conclude. I may deal with two other contentions raised on behalf of the Bengal Taxi Association. Mr. Somendra Chandra Bose, learned advocate for the petitioner, had urged that the Appellate Tribunal did not consider the objections raised by his clients to the consideration of new materials disclosed at the appellate stage. Mr. Bose has also submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have issued notice of the appeal upon the Commissioner of Police, calcutta and allowed him to make submissions. In the first place, both the local authority and the Commissioner of Police were entitled to file representations under section 50 of the Motor vehicles Act. Secondly, it had transpired that there was correspondence on the subject between the Chairman, regional Transport Authority and the commissioner of Police. Therefore, even if the Commissioner of Police was not a necessary party in the appeal under section 64 (1) (f) if the Act filed by the bengal Taxi Association and six others, he was at least a proper party whose presence was required by the Appellate tribunal to enable it to completely and effectually adjudicate upon and settle questions involved in the said appeal. The Bengal Taxi Association and others themselves produced before the tribunal certain papers along with their application filed on 8th -October, 1982. On 6th December, 1982 they had prayed before the Appellate Tribunal for directing the regional Transport Authority to produce the records mentioned in their application. I also find that the appeals before the Tribunal were not prejudiced by the aforesaid procedure adopted by the Appellate Tribunal. I may also observe that the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code in terms were inapplicable but the Appellate Tribunal functioning as a quasi-judicial authority was required to act objectively, fairly and in accordance with the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the Appellate tribunal as a judicial authority undoubtedly possesses inherent powers to decide questions of procedure and to adopt a suitable procedure in order to do that, justice for the administration of which it alone exists' (see observations of Sir asutosh Mookerjee, J. in Bechu Singh and another v. Becharam Sahu 10 C. L. J. 91 (100 ). Therefore, I find no legal impediment in the way of the Tribunal from receiving additional evidence broadly according to the principles embodied in order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, however, in view of my finding that the appellants before the Tribunal were not prejudiced, it is unnecessary to further pursue this point. For the foregoing reasons, the regional Transport Authority, Calcutta region, ought to be directed to again consider in accordance with law the -total number if permits which might be granted for plying Auto Rickshaws in the city of Calcutta and whether having regard to different aspects of public interest any restriction ought to be imposed regarding the areas within which they may ply. In view of the findings concurrently made about acute shortage of contract carriages Calcutta area, the Regional Transport Authority in given liberty to issue for the present one thousand Contract. Carriage Permits pending final fixation of the total number of permits for Auto Rickshaws. 19. FOR the foregoing reasons, I dispose of Civil Rule No. 4882 (W) of 1932 and also the writ application (Rule in Re. The State of West Bengal)filed by the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta region and others issued on June 14, 1983 in the following terms : -. 20. 19. FOR the foregoing reasons, I dispose of Civil Rule No. 4882 (W) of 1932 and also the writ application (Rule in Re. The State of West Bengal)filed by the Regional Transport Authority, calcutta region and others issued on June 14, 1983 in the following terms : -. 20. I set aside and quash the order dated 25th January, 1983 passed by Sri M. R. Mallick, Presiding Officer, State transport Appellate Tribunal, West Bengal modifying the resolution dated 28th april, 1982 passed by the Regional Transport authority, Calcutta Region. I further direct that let a writ of Mandamus issue upon the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta Region to fix total number of Contract Carriage Permits to be issued for plying three wheeler Auto rickshaws in Calcutta area having regard to the extent to which additional contract carriages may be necessary or desirable in public interest. I reject the rest of the challenges made by the Bengal Taxi Association and others against the resolutions dated 8th and 28th April 1982 passed by the Regional Transport authority, Calcutta Region. Pending passing of appropriate resolution by the regional Transport Authority, the Regional Transport Authority calcutta Region would be at liberty to consider the applications already received for grant of contract carriage permits for three wheeler Auto rickshaws and to grant not exceeding one thousend permits. There will be no order as to costs. Let the operation of the order remain stayed for one week from date. Rule disposed of.