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

1974 Supreme(SC) 417

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.N. RAY, C.J.I., P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, H.R. KHANNA AND P.K. GOSWAMI, JJ.
Hans Raj Kehar and others, Appellants
Versus
The State of U.P. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2072 of 1972, D/- 4-12-1974.
Advocate Appeared
M/s. S. K. Dhaon and S. Markandeya Advocates, for Appellants; Mr. D. N. Dikshit, Sr. Advocate (Mr. O. P. Rana Advocate with him), for Respondents.

Advocates:
D.K.Dixit, O.P.RANA, S.K.DHAVAN, S.Markandaya

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Section 43-A and 47 – Accident – Claim of Compensation - State Government may issue such directions of a general character a it may consider necessary or expedient in public interest in respect of any matter relating to road transport to State Transport Authority or to any Regional Transport Authority and such Transport Authority shall give effect to all such directions and shall also take into consideration any representations made by persons already providing passenger transport facilities by any means along or near proposed route or area or by any association representing persons interested in provision of road transport facilities recognized in this behalf by State Government or by any local authority or police authority within whose jurisdiction any part of proposed route or area lies – Held, Argument has also been advanced that deletion of Section 47 (3) would have effect of removing limit on number of permits for intra-region routes but that fact would not prevent imposition of a limit for number of permits for inter-region routes - This argument has been advanced in context of case of appellants that impugned provisions discriminate in matter of issue of permits for intra-region routes and those for inter-region routes and as such are violative of Article 14 of Constitution - Court are not impressed by this argument for we find no valid basis for inference that it these is no limit on number of permits for intra-region routes limit on number of permits for inter-region routes would have to be imposed- object of impugned notification is to liberalizes issue of permits and we fail to see as to how such a liberal measure can have effect of introducing strictness or stringency in matter of grant of permits for inter-region routes - Appeal dismissed

`

Judgment

KHANNA, J.:- The short question which arises in this appeal filed on certificate against the judgment of Allahabad High Court is the validity of Section 43-A, inserted in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 by U. P. Act No. 25 of 1972, and the notification dated March 30, 1972 issued under that section. The High Court upheld the validity of the section and the notification.

2. The material part of Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Act No. 4 of 1939), as it stood before the amendment made by Section 43-A in Uttar Pradesh, read as under :

"(1) A Regional Transport Authority shall, in considering an application for a stage carriage permit, have regard to the following matters, namely :

(a) the interest of the public generally;

(b) the advantages to the public of the Service to be provided, including the saving of time likely to be effected thereby and any convenience arising from journeys not being broken;

(c) the adequacy of other passenger transport services operating or likely to operate in the near future, whether by road or other means, between the places to be served;

(d) the benefit to any particular locality or localities likely to be afforded by the service;

(e) the operation by the applicant of other transport services, including those in respect of which applications from him for permits are pending;

(f) the condition of the roads included to the proposed route or area;

and shall also take into consideration any representations made by persons already providing passenger transport facilities by any means along or near the proposed route or area, or by any association representing persons interested in the provision of road transport facilities recognised in this behalf by the State Government, or by any local authority or police authority within whose jurisdiction any part of the proposed route or area lies;

...........................

(2) ....................................

(3) A Regional Transport Authority may, having regard to the matters mentioned in sub-section (1), limit the number of stage carriages generally, or of any specified type for which stage carriage permits may be granted in the region or in any specified area or any specified route within the region."

Section 43A has been inserted by the Motor Vehicles (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. 25 of 1972). The material part of Section 43A reads as under :

"(1) The State Government may issue such directions of a general character a, it may consider necessary or expedient in the public interest in respect of any matter relating to road transport to the State Transport Authority or to any Regional Transport Authority, and such Transport Authority shall give effect to all such directions.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, where the State Government is of opinion that it is in the public interest to grant stage carriage permits (except in respect of routes or areas for which schemes have been published under Section 68-C) or contract carriage permits or public carrier permits to all eligible applicants, it may by notification in the Gazette issue a direction accordingly, and thereupon all transport authorities as well as the State Transport Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 64 shall proceed to consider and decide all applications, appeals and revisions in that behalf (including any pending applications, appeals and revisions) as if

(a) in Section 47,

(i) for sub-section (1) the following sub-section were substituted :

(i) A Regional Transport Authority shall, in considering an application for a stage carriage permit, have regard to the following matters, namely:

(a) the interest of the public generally;

(b) the advantage to the public of the service to be provided, including the saving of time likely to be effected thereby and any convenience arising from journeys not being broken;

(c) the benefit to any particular locality or localities likely to be afforded by the service;

and shall also take into considerat















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