Order

C.A.No. 4637 of 1998 (@ SLP (C) No. 13937/92)

Leave granted.

2. The short question requiring our consideration is: whether the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter the ‘Corporation’) is required to renew the permits obtained by it to ply its vehicles on a notified route during the subsistence of a scheme? The High Court has answered the question in the affirmative.

3. In short, the facts leading to the filing of the appeal are that the Regional Manager, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Gorakhpur requested the Regional Transport Authorities for issuance of permits for routes covered by a scheme reserved for exclusive operation by the Corporation. In response to the Regional Manager’s letter, he was informed that according to the provisions of Section 58(2)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) permits could be issued for a maximum period of three years and were thereafter re­quired to be renewed. The appellants were informed that on payment of permit fee as well as the prescribed fee under Rule 55 of the U.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’) the permit issued to the Corporation should be got renewed. The a