Judgment

BEG, J.:- This appeal by special leave raises the question whether the State Government could, by a general direction given under Section 43 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) fix the charges to be imposed upon operators of stage carriages for carrying mails as conditions of their permits.

2. Section 48 of the Act lays down the power of the Regional Transport Authority to grant stage carriage permits with conditions annexed thereto. The first stage of exercise of this power is preceded by the quasi-judicial enquiry, under Section 47 of the Act, into the matters affecting the interests of public in general. Section 48, sub-section (1), subjecting the power to grant stage carriage permits to provisions of Section 47 of the Act, includes what may be correctly characterised as the "quasi-judicial" power either to grant or refuse to grant a permit after consideration of matters stated in Section 47 of the Act. After that, we come to the power to attach conditions laid down in S. 48 (3), and we find :

"48 (3) The Regional Transport Authority, if it decides to grant a stage carriage permit, may grant the permit for a service of stage carriages of a specified description or for one or more particular stage carriages, and may, subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, attach to the permit any one or more of the following conditions, namely........."

Out of a number of kinds of conditions which may be imposed, the xvth, given below, is relevant:

"(xv) that mails shall be carried on any of the vehicles authorised by the permit subject to such conditions (including conditions as to the time in which mails are to be carried and the charges which may be levied) as may be specified".

3. Now, it is contended on behalf of the appellants, that the power to attach conditions under Section 48 (3) is also quasi-judicial with which the State Government neither has nor ought to have any concern. The conditions of permits are prescribed by statute. It is for the authority, exercising the power quasi judicially to grant or not to grant permits to decide what conditions to attach or not to attach to each permit. It is not it is submitted, for the State Government to dictate any conditions to be attached. Hence, the challenge to the Government notification dated 30th May, 1968, which directed the State Transport Authority, to impose the charge of certain uniform rates of freight upon operators carrying mails or postal goods in stage carriages owned by operators other than State Transport Undertakings throughout the State. The State Transport Authority had, in its turn, issued a direction to the Regional Transport Authorities all over the State under Section 44 (1) of the Act to impose the duty of carrying the postal goods upon rates fixed by the Government as a condition annexed under Section 48 (3) (xv) to permits.

4. The relevant part of Section 43 (1) of the Act enacts:

"43 (1) A State Government having regard to -

(a) the advantage offered to the public, trade and industry by the above development of motor transport, and

(b) the desirability of co-ordinating road and rail transport, and

(c) the desirability of preventing the deterioration of the road system, and

(d) the desirability of preventing un-conomic competition among motor vehicles

may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, issue directions to the State Transport Authority-

(i) regarding the fixing of fares and freights for stage carriages, contract carriages and public carriers;"

5. Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that the power of the Government to issue directions relating to "freights" does not include imposition of charges for carrying postal goods as conditions of permits which the Regional Transport Authority grants in exercise of its quasi-judicial powers. The attack on the validity of the Government direction is thus twofold: firstly, that it falls outside the scope of Section 43 (1) of the Act as charges f