Sewak v Land Transport Authority [2014] FJMC 79; Appeal 11.2012 (13 May 2014)

In The Land Transport Appeals Tribunal
At Suva Appeal # 11 of 2012

Between:

Pradip Chand Sewak
Appellant

And:

Land Transport Authority
Respondent

Appellant: In Person
For LTA: Ms R May

Judgment

Introduction

The Appellant, Pradip Chand Sewak appealed to the Tribunal following the Respondents decision dated 18th November 2011 suspending Taxi Permit # LT2813.

The appellant had entered into an agreement with Ms Sandei Singh, the wife of the owner of the taxi permit, Bikram Singh, following Mr Singh’s demise for the purchase of Car Reg # LT2813.

One issue this Tribunal Notes is this case is that of the Locus Standi of the appellant in this matter. The Appellant was a party to a dealing of the Taxi. The permit that was suspended belonged to Bikram Singh and his wife as the personal representative or under a Probate or Letters of Administration holder would have “stood in his shoes” and been the aggrieved party. In this matter this Tribunal notes that the Appellant is appealing on the basis of the agreement and seeking that the Respondent and the Tribunal enforce the agreement.

Grounds of Appeal

From the submissions made by the Appellant This Tribunal notes that he is appealing to the Respondent to apply for the permit (vide letter dated 7th February 2012).

Hearing and Submissions Made
Having filed all necessary documents the parties agreed to have the matter heard by way of written submissions. This Tribunal has noted all the documents filed and the submissions made.

The Regulations and Procedures relating to grant of new Permits

Regulation 5 (1) of the Land Transport (Public Service Vehicles) Regulations 2000 sets out the matters which the LTA is required to take into consideration when it deals with applications for a new permit.

The Regulations and procedures relating to the application and grant of new permits is governed by Part 2 (Regs. 3 to 18) of Land Transport (Public Service Vehicles) Regulations 2000.

The Function and Powers of the Tribunal
Section 40 (2) of the Land Transport Act provides for the function of the Tribunal, which is “to hear and determine appeals against decisions of the Authority relating to –

(a) licensing of drivers under section 56;

(b) any matter requiring a decision of the Authority under Part VI;

and anyd any other matter prescribed by the Minister by regulations."

The powers of the Tribunal for the purposes of hearing and determining appealording to Section 46 are to "(a) to issue a summons mons to a witness in the prescribed for; (b) to call for the production of books, plans and documents; (c) to examine witnesses on oath or affirmation; (d) to admit any evidence whether written or oral and whether or not such evidence would be admissible in civil or criminal proceedings; (e) to exclude any person if necessary so as to ensure the proper conduct of the appeal or to preserve order."

Furthermore, under Section 46 (2) "on an appeal under this Part the Tribunal may dismiss tie appeal or make such order as it thinks just and reasonable in the circumstances directing the Authority to issue, transfer, or cancel any licence, certificate or permit, or to impose, vary, or remove any condition or restriction in respect of a licence, certificate or permit, and the Authority shall comply with that order." And under Section 46 (3) "Upon the determination of an appeal under this section the Tribunal may make such order as it thinks just with the respect to the costs of the appeal, and any person to whom any such costs are awarded may recover the amount of those costs in any court of competent jurisdiction, as a debt due from the person against whom those costs are awarded."

According to Section 47 the Tribunal "for the purposes of the hearing and determination of any appeal the Tribunal shall have regard to those matters which the Authority is required to have regard to in considering an application under this Act."

Analysis

This Tribunal notes that the Respondent suspended the Taxi Permit # LT2813 for illegal dealing after writing to the widow of the permit holder and asking her to show cause why the permit should not be cancelled, suspended or revoked. Mrs Singh was given a chance to respond. The Board later suspended the said Taxi permit.

The appellant in this case does not have locus standi to appeal in the matter as he is not, Mrs Singh and neither has he shown that he has any authority to represent her. In fact he is aggrieved party to the dealing with Mrs Singh. His cause of action relating to the agreement would be against Mrs Singh. The appellant cannot seek that the Respondent enforces the illegal dealing of the taxi permit. Regulation 17 (1) of the Land Transport (Public Service Vehicles) Regulations 2000 is clear that "the holder of a permit must not appoint an agent or representative for the purpose of exercising any right in the permit nor allow an agent or representative to exercise any right under it except with the prior consent of the Authority." Mrs Singh had no right to pass on the permit to Mr Sewak without prior consent of the Authority.

For the above-mentioned reasons the Appeal is dismissed.

Orders

- The Appeal is dismissed.
- No Order as to costs.

Chaitanya Lakshman
Land Transport Appeals Tribunal

13/5/2014