K. M. Shanmugam v. S. R. V. S. Private Limited and Others, AIR 1963 SC 1626

K.M. SHANMUGAM V. S.R.V.S PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS

Whether the High Court has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari, as the error, if any, was one of fact and that the directions issued by the Government under s. 43A of the Motor Vehicles Act?

On applications for permits made to it the Regional Transport Authority, applying the marking system prescribed by the Government order issued under Sec 43A of the Motor Vehicles Act granted the permit to the appellant.
On appeal by the respondent, the State Transport Appellate Tribunal recast the marks but in doing so did not allot any mark to the first respondent under the head of “residence or place of business” thereby treating the appellant and the first respondent as equal, gave the appellant the further advantage of four marks under the head “viable unit”.
The respondent challenged the order of the Appellate Tribunal before the High Court under Art. 226 on the ground that the Appellate Tribunal had failed to allot him any mark in respect of his admitted residential qualification and had thereby committed a breach of Sec 47 (1) (a) and (c) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Supreme Court held that the question was whether there was an error apparent on the face of the record to enable the High Court to interfere under Art. 226 of the Constitution was one to be determined in each case and no particular test can or need be laid down as a general rule.