JUDGMENT : Brieffacts of the case are that the petitioner-M/s Shyam Bus Service, filed an application for grant of newpermit to ply the vehicle on the route of Shahdol to Rewa on 26/09/2007 .Learned Transport Authority after considering the application granted permit in favour of petitioner M/s. Shyam Bus Service. Aggrieved by the aforesaid grant of permit, respondent no. 3 M/s Mahadev Prasad Pradhan BusOperator and respondent no.4 M/s Kaveri Travelspreferred a revision before the Chairman, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior which is registered as Revision Case No. 605/2009and they have taken objection that along-with the application for grant of newpermit the present petitioner M/s. Shyam Bus Servicehas not filed the requisite documents as required under the Rule 72 (3) ofMadhya Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "theRules of 1994" for brevity) . Similarly, no opportunity has been grantedto respondents no.3 and 4, whose vehicles are alreadyplying on the same route. After hearing both the parties, learned AppellateTribunal by the impugned order, set aside the permit granted in favour of the present petitioner and remanded the case forafresh hearing after giving an opportunity to all the parties concerned andfurther directed to decide the application within a period of fifteen days.Aggrieved by the aforesaid remand order, the petitioner came up before thisCourt by this petition. Havingheard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. Itis submitted by learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner that the petitionerhas filed the aforesaid application for grant of permit with requisitedocuments; and the learned Appellate Tribunal has wrongly set aside theaforesaid order without giving any cogent reason, therefore, prayed for settingaside of the remand order passed by learned Appellate Tribunal. Learnedcounsel for the respondents no.3 and 4 supported theimpugned order and prayed for dismissal of the petition. Onperusal of the impugned order passed by learned Appellate Tribunal, it isapparent that the learned Appellate Tribunal found certain irregularities inthe order passed by the respondent no2- Transport Authority, specially that nocompliance has been found with regard to the provisions of Rule 72 (3) of theRules of 1994. Similarly, the requisite documents werealso not produced by the petitioner before the licensing Authority and theorder itself is not found to be a speaking order in such circumstances, theAppellate Tribunal has remanded the case for afresh hearing after taking intoconsideration the order passed by the Licensing Authority. Similarly, the requisite documents werealso not produced by the petitioner before the licensing Authority and theorder itself is not found to be a speaking order in such circumstances, theAppellate Tribunal has remanded the case for afresh hearing after taking intoconsideration the order passed by the Licensing Authority. Weare of the considered opinion that if application for grant of permit has notbeen filed by the petitioner coupled with requisite documents as required underthe said R ale, then certainly the order for grant of permit is found to beerroneous in such circumstances, the learned Appellate Tribunal has notcommitted any error by passing the impugned order and remanding the case forafresh hearing. Rule72(3) of the Rules of 1994 prescribes for application for grant of stagecarriage permit, which reads as under: "72. Forms of application forpermits.- (1) xx xx xx (2) xx xx xx (3)The application for stage carriage permit or reserved stage carriage permit asrequired under sub-section (1) of Section 70 shall be accompanied by thefollowing documents, namely: (a) an authentic route map along-with certified distancebetween various stages and certificate regarding motor ability of the routeform the departments which have control over such road; (b) certificate from Registering Authority containingmake, model and seating capacity of the vehicles owned by the applicant at thetime of making the application; (c) details of the stage carriage and reserved stagecarriage permits already held by the applicant; (d) no dues certificate issued by the Regional TransportOfficer concerned; (e)declaration duly certified by an officer of the Madhya Pradesh State RoadTransport Corporation authorized by the Managing Director about the portion anddistance of the route covered by any nationalization scheme; and (f) any other information as may be required by theTransport Authority." Onperusal of the aforesaid provisions of Rule 72(3) of the Rules of 1994, it isapparent the aforesaid documents are required at the time when the applicationfor grant of new permit is to be considered by the concerning TransportAuthority. If the aforesaid conditions are not fulfilled then certainly, thenew permit cannot be granted in favour of thepetitioner. Under the similar circumstances, a Division Bench of this Court inthe case of Ashis Kumar Jain Vs. The M.P. State Tranport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior and two Others ,reported in 2010 (II) MPJR 190 . If the aforesaid conditions are not fulfilled then certainly, thenew permit cannot be granted in favour of thepetitioner. Under the similar circumstances, a Division Bench of this Court inthe case of Ashis Kumar Jain Vs. The M.P. State Tranport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior and two Others ,reported in 2010 (II) MPJR 190 . Held as under: - " if the pre-requisite conditions as provided under the MotorVehicles Act are not fulfilled, then certainly for the fulfillment of theaforesaid conditions the remand order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is foundto be proper." Inview of the aforesaid, we are of the considered opinion that the learnedAppellate Tribunal has not committed any error in remanding the case for afreshdecision after compliance of provisions of Rule 72(3) of the Rules of 1994. Consequently,the petition being devoid of any substance, is hereby dismissed with adirection to the concerning Transport Authority to decide the application ofthe petitioner after fulfillment of requisite requirements within a period ofthree weeks form the date of receipt of this order.