Judgment

V.R. KRISHNA IYER, J.:- The short question, involving a point of construction of Sec. 68-F (1D), has been raised by the Additional Solicitor General in these appeals by Special Leave.

2. The respondent was a stage carriage operator whose two permits were to expire in January and March 1976. In the usual course and in compliance with S. 58 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 (for short, The Act) he applied for renewal more than 120 days ahead but at the time of the actual date of expiry of the permits a draft scheme under Part IV-A had been published. This fulfilled the requirements of the proviso to S. 68-F (1D) and entitled the appellant to renewal for the limited period stated in the said proviso. But the State withdrew the draft scheme for some technical reasons and republished it in July 1975, after the appellants permit had expired. Applying the prohibition contained in S. 68-F (1D) the Regional Transport Authority (for short the R.T.A.) rejected the prayer for renewal. However, the High Court set aside that order and directed the grant of renewal, on a certain view of the section which the Additional Solicitor General contends goes beyond the limits of the plain words used