SOBHAG MAL JAIN, J.—This writ petition is directed against the order resolution of the R.T.A. dated the 12th September. 1985, dismissing the petitioners application for the grant of a temporary stage carriage permit on the Bhilwara-Shahpura route. 2. On the Bhilwara-Shahpura via Sanganer, Bada Hube, Deeokola, Doongri route, originally the scope fixed was of three permits to perform three return services. The R.T.A. revised and increased the scope to five permits of five return services. The increase was upheld in revision by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, by its order dated the 6th June, 1979. Against the original scope of three non-temporary stage carriage permits, one permit each was granted to : (1) Lal Chand. (2) Gyan Chand and (3) Sardar Gyan Singh. The permit in favour of Sardar Gyan Singh did not however, survive. 3. A draft scheme under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in relation to the Bhilwara-Deoli route via Mandal Choraha, Baneda, Doongri and Shahpura was published in the Rajas-than Rajpatra. The route covered by the scheme overlaps the Bhilwara-Shahpura route from Doongri to Shahpura, which is 13 kms. 4. Against the three vacancies, the R.T.A. granted temporary permits: to: (1) Ramesh Chand Chandmal, (2) Sharat Chand, the petitioner, and (3) Kamlesh Kumar Rajendra Kumar. The temporary permit granted to the petitioner was valid upto September 14, 1985. The petitioner, therefore, submitted further application for the grant of temporary permit on August 2, 1985. His application came up for consideration before the R.T.A. on September 12, 1985. The R.T.A., by its resolution dated the 12th September, 1985 rejected the petitioners application for the grant of temporary permit on the ground that applications for the grant of non-temporary stage carriage permits for Bhilwara-Shahpura route were then pending for consideration. Aggrieved by this order of the R.T.A., the petitioner has filed this writ petition in this Court. 5. Mr. R.N. Munshi, counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the applications for the grant of non-temporary permits on the route had merely been filed in the office of the R.T.A. and the same could not be said to be pending within the meaning of Section 62 (1) of the Act, Mr. 5. Mr. R.N. Munshi, counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the applications for the grant of non-temporary permits on the route had merely been filed in the office of the R.T.A. and the same could not be said to be pending within the meaning of Section 62 (1) of the Act, Mr. Munshi has further submitted that the portion Bhilwara-Doongri only was the unaffected portion from the draft scheme published under Section 68-C and this part of the route alone was open for non-temporary permits. The petitioners application for temporary permit was for the entire route Bhilwara-Shahpura and as such his application could not be dismissed on the ground that as applications for non-temporary stage carriage permits were pending, temporary permit could not be granted under Section 62 (1) of the Act. 6. The question for consideration in this petition is, since when the application for the grant of a permit under Section 46 or Section 54 shall be deemed to be pending to attract the bar of the first proviso to sub-Sec. (1) of Section 62. Sub section (1) of Section 62 with its two provisos is set out below :- "62. Temporary permits.-(1) A Regional Transport Authority may without following the procedure laid down in section 57, grant permits, to to be effective for a limited period not in any case to exceed four months, to authorise the use of a transport vehicle temporally- (a) for the conveyance of passengers on special occasions such as to and from fairs and religious gatherings, or (b) for the purposes of a seasonal business, or (c) to meat a particular temporary need, (or) (d) pending decision on an application for the renewal of a permit, and may attach to any such permit any condition it thinks fit: Provided that a temporary permit under this section shall, in no case, be granted in respect of any route or area specified in an application for the grant of a new permit under section 46 or section 54 during the pendency of the application: Provided further that a temporary permit under this section shall in no case, be granted more than once in respect of any route or area specified in an application for the renewal of a permit during the pendancy of such application for renewal." 7. Sub-section (1) confers on the R.T.A. the power to grant temporary permits to meet temporary and special needs. The power to grant permit to meet the temporary need under clause (c) is circumscribed by the first proviso. The words "in no case" emphasise the absolute nature of the prohibition. To understand the true span of the expression "during the pendency of the application" it shall be necessary to have a look at Section 57 of the Act, which laps down the procedure for filing the application and granting permits. Subsection (1) to (5) of Section 57, which are relevant for our purpose are set out below :- 57. Procedure in applying for and granting permits-(1) on application for contract carriage permit or a private carriers permit may be at any time. (2) An application for a stage carriage permit or a public carriers permit shall be made not less than six weeks before the date on which it is desired that the permit shall take effect, or if the Regional Transport Authority appoints dates for the receipt of such applications, on such dates. (2) An application for a stage carriage permit or a public carriers permit shall be made not less than six weeks before the date on which it is desired that the permit shall take effect, or if the Regional Transport Authority appoints dates for the receipt of such applications, on such dates. (3) On receipt of an application for a stage carriage permit or a public carriers permit, the Regional Transport authority shall make the application available for inspection at the office of the Authority and shall publish the application or the substance thereof in the prescribed manner together with a notice of the date before which representations in connection there with may be submitted and the date, nor being less than thirty days from such publication, on which, and the time and place at which, the application and any representations, received will be considered : a (provided that, if the grant of any permit in accordance with the application or with modifications would have the effect of increasing the number of vehicles operating in the region, or in any area or on any route within the region, under the class of permit to which the application relates, beyond the limit fixed in that behalf under sub-section (3) of section 47 or sub-section (2) of section 55, as the case may be, the Regional Transport Authority may summarily refuse the application without following procedure laid down in this sub-section.) (4) No representation in connection with an application referred to in sub-section (3) shall be considered by the Regional Transport Authority unless it is made in writing before the appointed date and unless a copy thereof is furnished simultaneously to the applicant by the person making such representation. (5) When any representation such as is referred to in sub-section (3) is made, the Regional Transport Authority shall dispose of the application at public hearing at which the applicant and the person making the representation shall have an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a duly authorised representative. 8. (5) When any representation such as is referred to in sub-section (3) is made, the Regional Transport Authority shall dispose of the application at public hearing at which the applicant and the person making the representation shall have an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a duly authorised representative. 8. A perusal of the above provisions reveal that the application for the grant of a permit has to pass the following stages, namely, - (1) On receipt of the application, which has to be made atleast six weeks before the date the permit is to be effective, the R. T. A. makes the same available for inspection at its office and also publishes it in the prescribed manner: (2) The R. T. A. announces the time schedule for receipt of representations and for consideration of the application and the representations. The date for consideration so fix shall not be less than 30 days from its publication the application is disposed of by the R.T.A. at public hearing where opportunity of being heard is given to the applicant and the persons making the representations. In this setting of 57, the expression "during the pendency of the application" has to be construed. Mr. R. N. Munshi has cited the case of K. Prakashan v. Secretary R.T.A. (1) of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which has given a restricted meaning to the expression "pendency the application to mean the period from the date of hearing to the actual date of grant of permit.". The learned Single Judge of the said High Court has said:- "The proximity of pendency of application is when R.T.A. is actually seized of the matter by hearing as contemplated under Section 57 (5) of the Act. The vulnerable period is from the date of hearing by R.T.A. to actual date of grant of permit." Mr. Vyas had, on the other hand, invited my attention to Sri Ram v. R.T.A. (2) and M/s Shiv Bus Service v. R.T.A., Jodhpur (3). In Sri Ram v. R.T.A., Kan Singh, J, has said:- "Section 62 came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court 1961 R.L.W. 16: (AIR 1961 Raj. 98 FB), It was decided therein that the first proviso relates to clause (c) only, while the second proviso to the present matter. In Sri Ram v. R.T.A., Kan Singh, J, has said:- "Section 62 came up for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court 1961 R.L.W. 16: (AIR 1961 Raj. 98 FB), It was decided therein that the first proviso relates to clause (c) only, while the second proviso to the present matter. There fore even to meet a particular temporary need it will not be open to the Regional Transport Authority to grant temporary permit if an application for grant of a permit under Section 46 is pending at the material time." In M/s. Shiv Bus Services S. K. Mal Lodha J. after noticing the judgments of this Court has said:- "It is thus, clear from the aforesaid decisions that the Resolution of the R.T.A to grant temporary permits on the routes in regard to which applications for grant of non-temporary stage carriage permits were pending was without jurisdiction and when an order was passed patently without jurisdiction, then the bar of alternative remedy of revision would not stand in the way of granting relief to the petitioner in a petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution." 9. In J. T. Cooperative Society v. R.T.A. (5), Dave, J. with whom Sarjoo Prasad C. J. agreed observed as under:- "The meaning and purpose of the first proviso is to direct the RTA that if an application for a non-temporary permit under sec. 56 of s. 54 of the Act is presented for any route or area, then it should be decided expeditiously, according to law, and so long as it remains pending, no temporary permit should be given under any circumstances to the applicant for non-temporary permit or to any other person in respect of the said route or area, in the name of, or under the guise of, meeting a particular temporary need under clause (c)." 10. In Jaikishan v. R.T.A. (5), I. N. Modi, J., observed:- "while it is true the existence of a permanent need will not preclude the Regional Transport Authority from issuing a temporary permit, if the necessary conditions laid down in Sec. 62 of the Act are found to be there, yet in case an application for grant of a non-temporary permit, has already been field and the same is pending then, during the pendency of such an application the Regional Transport Authority will not be competent to issue a temporary permit under Cl. (c) of Sec. 62 of the Act. Once the stage is reached when an application for grant of non-temporary permit is pending before the Regional Transport Authority, the jurisdiction of the Regional Transport Authority to then issue temporary permits is taken away." 11. The observations made by this Court in the cases quoted above, particularly the observations of Dave, J. in J. T. Cooperative Societys case that when an application for a non-temporary permit is presented, the same should be decided expeditiously and so long as it remains pending no temporary permit should in respect of the said route makes it clear that the RTA has no jurisdiction to grant a temporary permit under proviso to Section 52 (i) (c) when the applications for grant of non-temporary stage carriage permits are pending on the route in question. This Court preferred a narrow construction to the expression "during the pendency of the application. When an application is presented, complete in all respects, and remains undecided it is said to be pending and the inter alia period is considered as a period of pendency. It originates when it is presented and the moment it is decided it ceases to be pending Even if a restricted meaning is given to the expression "during the pendency of the application" the pendency will begin when on receipt of the application the R. T. A. puts it for inspection and sends it for publication in the Rajpatra. The inviting of objections, filing of representations and the consideration of the applications and the objections by the R. T. A. are all steps taken during the pendency of application. The meaning of the expression is clear and its span can neither be expanded nor curtailed. 12. The inviting of objections, filing of representations and the consideration of the applications and the objections by the R. T. A. are all steps taken during the pendency of application. The meaning of the expression is clear and its span can neither be expanded nor curtailed. 12. Now I come to the question whether applications for non-temporary permits were pending when the application for temporary permit filed by the petitioner came up for consideration before the R.T.A. Mr. R.R. Vyas, during the course of arguments, filed a copy of the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated the 5th September, 1985. It contains a notification under Section 57 of the Act notifying the names of applicants and the routes for which the said applications were made. A perusal of this notification reveals that six applications had been filed in the R. T. A. for the Bhilwara - Shahpura route. Serial Nos. 22 to 27 contain the particulars of the applications for this route. Significantly, the petitioner was also one of the applicants. The entries relevant to these applications are extracted below- S. No. Name of the applicant Name of the route Date of application. xx xx xx xx 22. Shri Rameshchandra Samdani son of Ramjas Samdani, Nadi Mohalla, Doongari. Bhilwara to Shahpura via Sanganer Baba Mabus, Dhikoli, Bhilwara. 19/5/85 23. M/s. Govindram Bhagwan Das son of Lalchand, Bandari ka Chowk. " 15/7/85 24. Shri Govindram son of Lalchand, resident of Shahpura. Bhilwara to Shahpura via Sanganer Bada Mahua, Dhikoli, Doongari. 31/7/85 25. Shri Kamlesh Kumar Rajendra Kumar. Bhilwara. " 2/8/85 26. Shri Rameshchandra Chandmal, Bhilwara. " 2/8/85 27. Shri Sharatchandra Gokharu son of Phool Chand, Sevasadan Road, Bhilwara Bhilwara to Shahpura vis Sanganer Bada Mahua, Dhikoli. 2/8/85 The application of the petitioner for temporary permit came up for consideration before the R.T.A. on September 12,1985. One application by Ramesh Chand Samdaria for non-temporary permit on the route had been filed as back as June 19, 1985; two other application were filed in July and the remaining three including that of the petitioner were filed in August 1985. As seen above, all these applications were published in the Rajpatra dated September 5, 1985 and scheduled to be considered by the R.T.A. in its meeting to be held on October 10, 1985. As seen above, all these applications were published in the Rajpatra dated September 5, 1985 and scheduled to be considered by the R.T.A. in its meeting to be held on October 10, 1985. In such circumstances, I concur with view of the R.T.A. that applications for the grant of non-temporary permits were pending when the application of the petitioner for the grant of temporary permit came up for consideration before the R.T.A. The proviso to Section 62 is in absolute terms and the R.T.A was justified in not granting temporary permit to the petitioner on the ground that applications for non-temporary permit for the route were then pending. 13. As regards the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the route for the grant of non-temporary permit was open only from Bhilwara to Doongari whereas the petitioners application for temporary permit was for the entire route Bhilwara - Shahpura and as such his application could not be dismissed under the proviso to Section 62, suffice it to say that the said proviso envisages the pendency of the application for the route. What is relevant is the route specified in the applications for the grant of non-temporary permits filed under Section 46. What ultimately would be the result of those applications is not a matter to be considered for the purposes of Section 62(1) proviso. The applications which were filed and published in the Rajpatra were for the entire route Bhilwara - Shahpura and the inhibition of the proviso to Section 62 (1) was clearly attracted. 14. It is thus clear that applications for non-temporary permit were pending when the petitioners application for temporary permit for the route came to be considered by the R.T.A. and the order of the R.T.A. dismissing the petitioners application for the grant of a temporary permit was in accordance with the provisions of the first proviso to Section 62 (1) of the Act. 15. The result is that there is no substance in this writ petition and the same is dismissed.