BALAKRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) SINCE common questions of fact and law arise in these cases, these writs are disposed of by a common order. ( 2 ) THE question presented for determination is whether the Secretary, State transport Authority, "bangalore, was in error in granting a temporary stage carriage permit for operating one vehicle from Kadiri to bangalore. It may be stated at the out set that the case is too plain to waste many words over it. The principle governing the grant of permits whether regular or temporary is too well known to be re-stated. ( 3 ) THE first petitioner has an existing stage carriage permit on the route Puttaparthi to bangalore, with two trips, and Bangalore to puttaparthi with two trips, the route passing through Chickballapur, Bagepalli, kodikonda, Penukonda and Bukkapatna. The second petitioner is an operator of a stage carriage service on the route Bangalore to Kadiri, via Devanahalli, Chickballapur, bagepalli and Gorantla with two trips and also another vehicle operated in the opposite direction from Kadiri to Bangalore, via gorantla, Bagepalli, Chickballapur and devanahalli. ( 4 ) THE essential facts are : that respondent -2 applied for grant of a temporary stage carriage permit on 8-6-1988 for operating two vehicles in opposite direction from bangalore to Kadiri and back. Apparently, the application was filed under the provisions of Section 62 (l) (a), (b) and (c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, relevant for the period from 1-7-1988 to 31-10-1988. It is further stated that the application was filed in order to continue the operation of the services after the previous temporary permit expired on 30-6-1988 and further the said application is the fourth in the series for successive grant of temporary permits. ( 5 ) IN a cryptic order, the authority acted on the application dated 8-6-1988 and granted permit upto 31-10-1988 vide Annexure -A. The order issuing permit is Annexure -B. Obviously, the petitioners are dissatisfied with the order which is erroneous according to them on several grounds and mainly on the ground of non-application of mind and arbitrariness. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has brought to my notice the Gazette containing draft Inter-State Agreement regarding increase of trips allotted to the Karnataka motor Vehicles Operators. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has brought to my notice the Gazette containing draft Inter-State Agreement regarding increase of trips allotted to the Karnataka motor Vehicles Operators. At Page 24 of the said Gazette dated 1-1-1987 in serial No. 12 of page 24, the route envisaged is bangalore to Kadiri via Hebbal, Yelahanka, dcvanahalli, Avathi, Chickballapur, peresandra, Bagepalli, Kodikonda and palasamudram. There is no provision for inter State route from Kadiri to Bangalore as such. What is permissible is only the operation of the motor vehicle from bangalore to Kadiri and back only. ( 6 ) ON the ground alone, it is sufficient for me to hold that the petitioners succeed in these writ petitions, besides other grounds such as non-application of mind and arbitrariness in passing of the impugned orders by the Quasi Judicial Authority (Respondent-1 ). The writ petitions are allowed. The secretary, Karnataka State Transport authority, Bangalore (respondent-1) is directed to pass an order making suitable alteration to the order already passed to the effect that the temporary permit issued is from Bangalore to Kadiri and back for both vehicles. Consequent to the modification, respondent-1 is directed to reassign the timings. It is not too late for respondent-1 before making modification to assign the reasons in clear language in support of the grant so as to comply with the requirements of law. This direction shall be carried out within one week from the date of receipt of this order. ( 7 ) THESE writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. If an application is made by the parties to the proceedings for grant of certified copy of the order, it shall be granted by the office today. --- *** --- .