SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 82

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Afsar Jahan Begum – Appellant
Versus
State Of M. P. – Respondent


ORDER

Substitution allowed in W.P. (C) No. 8330/81.

2. All these writ petitions and appeal are disposed of by common judgment since common question of law arises for decision in these cases.

3. Admittedly, the routes on which the petitioners/appellants are seeking to intersect and ply their vehicles are notified routes. The notified routes were published and became final under Chapter IV-A of Act 4, 1939. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 introduced Chapter VI as a special provision relating to the State transport undertakings. Section 99 authorises preparation and publication of the proposal regarding road transport service of a State transportundertaking. Section 102 deals with cancellation or modification of the schemes. It provides that the State Government may, at any time, if it consider necessary in the public interest so to do, modify any approved scheme after giving : (i) the State transport undertaking ; and (ii) any other person who in the opinion of the State Government is likely to be affected by the proposed modification an opportunity of being heard in respect of the proposed modification.

4. Under sub-section (2), the State Government shall publish the modification propose

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top