JUDGMENT : TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, J. 1. It is rather unfortunate that despite the Regional Transport Authorities having suffered severe indictment in a judgment rendered by one of us (Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.), in case titled Ajay Parihar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, CWP No. 7295 of 2012, with regard to their functioning and conduct, have shown no signs of improvement. 2. In Ajay Parihar's case supra, the Regional Transport Authority had been inviting applications for grant of route permits and after considering the same suo motu was granting the same in violation to the procedure as provided in Rule 60 of the Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicle Rules, 1999. This compelled the Court to make the following observations: "11. Unfortunately these principles have been violated in wholesome in the case in hand, whereby Regional Transport Authority has arbitrarily indulged in dolling out route permits. Such flagrant abuse and misuse of power cannot be countenanced. As a matter of fact, the Regional Transport Authority was not even conferred or even vested with any discretionary power and was thus required to have strictly adhered to the procedure as prescribed in the Rules. 12. Therefore, when an action is taken in furtherance of explicit power given by a statute, the legitimacy of invoking such power shall depend entirely upon the extent of achieving net and objective for which the statute enables the exercise of such power. 13. It is more than settled that law cannot be administered with an evil eye or with an unequal hand or for an oblique or unworthy performance and the arms of this court will be long enough to reach out and strike down such a view with a heavy hand. 14. The Regional Transport Authority, more particularly, the Regional Transport Officer could not have abused his/their power and trust under the camouflage of performance of their public duty and thereby in an arbitrary and illegal manner allotted route permits, that too by receiving suo motu applications in utter disregard and gross violation of the procedure contemplated under the Rules. 15. It needs to be reiterated that public offices, both big and small, are sacred trusts. Such offices are meant for use and not abuse and in case repositories of such offices surpass the rule, then the law is not that powerless and would step in to quash such arbitrary orders. 16. 15. It needs to be reiterated that public offices, both big and small, are sacred trusts. Such offices are meant for use and not abuse and in case repositories of such offices surpass the rule, then the law is not that powerless and would step in to quash such arbitrary orders. 16. Respondent No.4, being a creation of statute, is admittedly a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and cannot, therefore, act like a private individual, who is free to act in a manner whatsoever he likes, unless it is interdicted or prohibited by law. It is settled that the State and its instrumentalities have to act strictly within the four corners of law and all its activities are government by Rules, regulations and instructions. It is more than settled that whenever a statutory authority is required to do a thing in a particular manner, then the same must be done in that manner or not at all. 17. In Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur Vs. Daulat Mal Jain & ors, (1997) 1 SCC 35 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under: "13. All purposes or actions for which moral responsibility can be attached are actions performed by individual persons composing the Department. All Government actions, therefore, means actions performed by individual person to further the objectives set down in the Constitution, the laws and the administrative policies to develop democratic traditions. Social and economic democracy are set down in the Preamble, Part III of H.P. 9 and Part IV of the Constitution. The intention behind the Government actions and purposes is to further the public welfare and the national interest. Public good is synonymous to protection of the interests of the citizens as a territorial unit or nation as a whole. It also aims to further the public policies. The limitations of the policies are kept along with the public interest to prevent the exploitation or misuse or abuse of the office or the executive actions for personal gain or for illegal gratification. 14. The so-called public policy cannot be a camouflage for abuse of the power and trust entrusted with a public authority or public servant for the performance of public duties. Misuse implies doing of something improper. The essence of impropriety is replacement of a public motive for a private one. 14. The so-called public policy cannot be a camouflage for abuse of the power and trust entrusted with a public authority or public servant for the performance of public duties. Misuse implies doing of something improper. The essence of impropriety is replacement of a public motive for a private one. When satisfaction sought in the performance of duties is for mutual personal gain, the misuse is usually termed as corruption. The holder of a public office is said to have misused his position when in pursuit of a private satisfaction, as distinguished from public interest, he has done something which he ought not to have done. The most elementary qualification demanded of a Minister is honesty and incorruptibility. He should not only possess these qualifications but should also appear to possess the same. 15. In the Encyclopedia of Democracy by Seymour Martin Lipset, Vol. 1, page 310, in the Chapter "Corruption'', it is stated that corruption is an abuse of public resources for private gain. The occasions for political corruption increases when control On the activity of public administrators are fragile and the division of power between political actors and the public bureaucrats, as well as between the Government and the middle man, is Unclear, It is difficult to discover and punish cases of corruption. Research has shown that political corruption tends to be more widespread in authoritarian or totalitarian regimes and when public opinion and the press are unable to denounce corruption. Corruption develops because of con-fusion about the borders between State and society and between traditional and modern values. It can be expected to grow during phases of transition. Corruption should disappear in modern stable democratic societies. In-stead, it is growing. Since State intervention in economic and social life has increased the occasions for political corruption, new technologies have increased the cost of electoral campaigns and the professionalisation of political careers has increased the number of those who have to make a living from politics rather than living for politics. Corruption has not disappeared. Corruption has dangerous consequences for politics. Since State intervention in economic and social life has increased the occasions for political corruption, new technologies have increased the cost of electoral campaigns and the professionalisation of political careers has increased the number of those who have to make a living from politics rather than living for politics. Corruption has not disappeared. Corruption has dangerous consequences for politics. Al-though political corruption is more widespread in non-democratic regimes, it is particularly dangerous for democracy because' it undermines two of the major principles on which democracies are based; the equality of citizens' rights and the transparency of the political decision-making process; Bribes open the way for access to the State for those who are willing to pay and can afford the price. The situation may leave non-corrupt citizens with the belief that one "counts" only if one has the right personal contacts with those who hold power. Because of its illegal nature, corruption increases the range of public decision that are made in secrecy: It was suggested that internal controls on public bureaucracies through administrative controls and accounting procedures as well as ombudsman systems for public complaints, are remedies to control political corruption. The rules of Code of Conduct for political executives, public servants and private entrepreneurs, emphasising merit and regulated system of appointment in state bureaucracy and Stimulating pride in public service, would generate remedies for political corruption." 18. From the discussion above, it is manifest that the entire procedure as adopted by the respondents stands vitiated on account of not following the mandatory procedure as prescribed under the Rules. Absence of power apart, such exercise of the respondents is fraught with danger of being activated by extraneous considerations. The action of the respondents, to say the least, is totally arbitrary. 3. As regards the instant case, the same is yet another classical example where the Regional Transport Authority, Una, for apparently no rhyme or reason, has been repeatedly adjourning the meeting regarding the adjustment of timetable on the route 'Hoshiarpur-Anandpur Sahib via Jahan Khelan, Check Sandhu - Una, Mehatpur Nangal'. This is clearly evident from the fact that the meeting initially was fixed on 10.04.2018 and the same was adjourned to 02.05.2018, when again no decision was taken and adjourned to 08.06.2018, when again no decision whatsoever was taken and the meeting was simply adjourned. 4. This is clearly evident from the fact that the meeting initially was fixed on 10.04.2018 and the same was adjourned to 02.05.2018, when again no decision was taken and adjourned to 08.06.2018, when again no decision whatsoever was taken and the meeting was simply adjourned. 4. Therefore, in the given circumstances, we dispose of this petition with the direction to respondent No. 3 to positively convene a meeting within one week and decide the issue in question positively in the said meeting. 5. It goes without saying that the decision shall be taken irrespective of any of the stakeholder(s) despite service not participating in the said meeting. 6. At the same time, we direct the Principal Secretary, Transport to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to look into the working of all the Regional Transport Officers/Authorities in the State in light of the judgment in Ajay Parihar's case. 7. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.