Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc.

Mr. Justice Douglas delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a direct appeal from a final judgment of a three-judge District Court, 28 U. S. C. §§ 1253, 2101, invalidating an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Ten applications of motor carriers to conduct general commodities operations between points in the Southwest and Southeast were consolidated in one proceeding. Three additional applicants were allowed to intervene. The hearing examiners, after extensive hearings, rejected each application. The Commission granted three of the applications of appellant carriers. Appel-lees, competing carriers, brought an action in the District Court, 28 U. S. C. § 1336, to suspend, enjoin, and annul that portion of the order of the Commission that authorizes issuance of certificates of public convenience and necessity to Red Ball, Bowman, and Johnson. The District Court refused to enforce the Commission’s order because its findings and conclusions were arbitrary, capricious, and without rational basis within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U. S. C. § 706, and likewise refused to remand the case believing that no useful purpose would be served, 364 F. Supp. 1239, 1264. [1] [*284] The Administrative Procedure Act in 5 U. S. C. § 706 provides that:

“The reviewing court shall... (2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be— “(A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law [or] ...