Prasad v Land Transport Authority [2015] FJLTAT 14; Appeal 35, 36.2006 (10 July 2015)

In The Land Transport Appeals Tribunal
Sitting At Nausori

Appeal #’s 35 of 2006 and
36 of 2006.

Between:

Rajendra Deo Prasad
Appellant

And:

Land Transport Authority
1st Respondent

And:

Prem Chand and Sons T/A Dwarka Buses Limited
Prem Chand and Sons Limited
Parmod Enterprises
Interested Parties

Appearances/Representations:
For Appellant: Mr. Ramesh Prakash (at the Time of the Hearing) – Currently Mr A. Pal
For LTA: Mr. Seremaia Waqainabete (at time of Hearing) – Currently Mr Stephens.
For Interested Party: Mr. Viren Kapadia (Parmod Enterprises)

Judgment

Introduction

These Appeals were heard by the previous Tribunal (Mr Bale) on 13th April 2009 and the judgments for these matters were on notice. When the matter was called before the current Tribunal the parties agreed that this Tribunal peruse the records and minutes of the previous Tribunal together with all documents and deliver a judgement in the two pending appeals.

The two appeals arise from a decision of the LTA dated 9th August 2006 and communicated via letter dated 16th August 2006 to reissue and transfer road route permit 12/23/52 (permit no.52) and transfer road route permit 12/23/24 (permit no. 24) from Prem Chand and Sons trading as Dwarka Buses to Parmod Enterprises Limited.

Appeal No. 35 of 2006

Is the appeal against the decision of 16th August 2006 whereby LTA granted an application for transfer of a Road Permit (Road Route License 12/23/52) from Prem Chand and Sons T/A Dwarka Buses Limited to Parmod Enterprises Limited and also approved the re-issue of Road Route License 12/23/52.

13 grounds of appeal were listed in the notice of appeal filed on 30th August 2006 as follows:

“1. THAT the Authority erred in proceeding to hear the application for Transfer of Road Route Licence No. 12/23/52 from Prem Chand and Sons T/A Dwarka Buses Limited to Parmod Enterprises Limited on the 9th August 2006 and granted the application when;

1. The Authority had earlier heard the same application on the 16th of February 2006 and decided as follows;
   

“1. The status quo remains – Parmod to continue with the existing services until further notice

1. Issue a temporary licence for three months