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

1973 Supreme(SC) 394

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, S.N. DWIVEDI AND P.K. GOSWAMI, JJ.
Rattanlal Gupta and others, Etc., Appellants
Versus
Suraj Bhan and others etc., Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 1592-1595 of 1971:
Civil Appeals Nos. 1628-1631 of 1971:
Suraj Bhan Appellant
Versus
The State Transport Authority and others, Respondents. 392
Civil Appeals Nos. 1634-1639 of 1971:
Harish Chandra and others, Appellants
Versus
State Transport Appellate Authority and others, Respondents.
Special Leave Petition (Civ) Nos. 3094 and 3095 of 1971:
M/s. Bhumarg Yatayat, Petitioner
Versus
State Transport Appellate Tribunal U.P. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 1592-1595, 1628-1631, 1634-1639 of 1971 and Special Leave Petn. (Civ) Nos. 3094 and 3095 of 1971, D/-.

Advocates:
A.T.M.SAMPATH, B.C.AGRAWAL, H.K.PURI, Indira Manchanda, J.P.GOYAL, R.K.GARG, RANI ARORA, S.C.AGRAWAL, S.K.Bagga, V.C.PRASHAR, YOGESHAR PRASAD

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Section 47 (3), (1), 57 (8), 47, 48 and 57 - U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1977 - Regional Transport Authority - Route for Stage Carriage Permit - Grant of Permits - Whether for extended or unextended route should have been taken up together - Whether there were two routes or one route and then fixed strength of route or routes - Whether it is necessary to notionally separate whole route into two overlapping routes for purposes of granting permits - Whether Regional Transport Authority could decide number of permits while considering applications for permits – Held, As RTA had not fixed number of permits for longer route, Court agree with High Court that grant of permits for longer route is invalid - But legal position in regard to grant of permits on shorter route is different - Admittedly, RTA had fixed number of permits for this route at 25 - As 17 permits had already been granted, RTA invited applications for eight vacancies - So strength was fixed long before invitation of applications for permits - It may be mentioned at this place that in August meeting RTA reduced strength of shorter route from 25 to 9 - That could not be done - In result, there would remain eight vacancies on shorter route for which RTA had already invited applications - So RTA could validly grant eight permits to appellants in third group - STA rightly affirmed this decision of RTA - High Court, in Court view, was not right in quashing grant of permits to appellants in third group - Permits granted to appellants in third group of appeals, if already cancelled in pursuance of order of High Court, will be restored to them - Shri Garg, counsel for appellants, has given an undertaking that appellants will surrender permits granted to them for longer route - Order accordingly.

Judgment

GOSWAMI, J. :- There are three groups of appeals with certificate directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court of 30th September, 1969. The first group (Civil Appeals Nos. 1592-1595 of 1971) is by Rattan Lal Gupta, Uma Sharan Sharma, Sewa Ram, Dharam Das Agarwal, Land Lines Pvt. Ltd., Smt. Kusum Lata and Tribhuvan Kumar, the last two being the widow and son of Madan Mohan Lal, deceased. The second group (Civil Appeals Nos. 1628 1631 of 1971) is by Suraj Bhan (in Civil Appeal No. 1628 of 1971) and others. The third group (Civil Appeals Nos. 1634-1639 of 1971) is by Harish Chandra, Mahendra Kumar Tayal, Shanti Swarup Jain, Mitranand Kaushik, Baru Mal Agarwal, Gur Prasad, Richpal Singh and Bhagwan Singh Sambi. There are also two Special Leave petitions Nos. 3094-3095 of 1971 which have not been admitted but by an order of this Court dated 7th February, 1972, the petitioners were allowed to intervene in these appeals.

2. The facts relating to the appeals have got to be narrated in some detail. On October 13, 1950, a route for stage carriage permit described as Muzaffarnagar-Budhana-Kandhla (hereinafter the shorter route) was classified as `B class route and the strength of the permit was fixed at 17. On July 18, 1958, the Regional Transport Authority (briefly RTA) Meerut decided to extend the route by about six miles upto Issumpurteel (hereinafter the longer route). On March 23, 1959, the RTA increased the strength of the shorter route from 17 to 25 under section 47 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (briefly the Act). As there were already 17 permits in operation, the RTA on June 13, 1959, advertised for 8 vacancies in the shorter route and fixed July 27, 1959, as the last date for receiving the applications and it appears 1117 applications were received. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal (briefly STA) approved the extension of the route to Issupurteel on August 8, 1959. The applications which were received in response to the advertisement were published in the U. P. Gazette of September 15, 1962. There were some other applications on June 16, 1963, including a second application of M. N. Kaushik. These were also published in the U. P. Gazette on June 16, 1963 Mohd. Ibrahim filed his objections to the applications published on September 15, 1962. He objected to the increase in the strength and to the route being wrongly described in the advertisement. On 2nd to 4th August, 1961, the RTA had decided that there was only one route upto Issupurteel and that applications presented either up to Kandhla or upto Issupurteel should be considered as presented for the entire route viz, the longer route. The RTA also held that Muzaffanagar-Budhana-Kandhla route ceased to exist in 1958 by referring to its earlier resolution No.71 of 18th July 1958 and that thereafter the only route that survived was the longer route upto Issupurteel. It appears most of the existing permits for the shorter route were in the meantime converted into the longer route under Section 57 (8) of the Act Suraj Bhan s application for a permit was published on November 2, 1963. Meanwhile 7 renewal applications from the existing permit holders were received between November 4, 1963 and May 18, 1964, in anticipation of expiry of their permits. The appellants in the first group objected to these renewals and prayed for grant of fresh permits to them for the longer route. On June 13, 1964, their objections to the renewals as well as those for fresh permits were published in the Gazette. On July 4, 1964, some more applications were published for the longer route. To give some more details, thirteen applications for the longer route were published on July 1, 1961; twenty-seven on June 15, 1963 and two on November 2, 1963. Mohd. Ibrahim and his union of the existing operators objected to these applications. On 28th and 29th August, 1964, the RTA considered only 11 renewal applications and 12 fresh applications and other applications were not even put






















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 Back to top