Judgment

E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, J.:- In these appeals by special leave filed against the common judgment dated March 23, 1982 of the Allahabad High Court, the validity of two Notifications issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh under Section 43-A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (Act IV of 1939) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as in force in the State of Uttar Pradesh arises for consideration. The two impugned Notifications are reproduced below :

I.

"Notification

No. 68 T/XXX-4-15-KM/79

Dated : Lucknow : January 10, 1981

Whereas, the Government of Uttar Pradesh 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 S. 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939) to all eligible applicants :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers under Section 43-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh is pleased to direct that the stage carriage permits (except in respect of routes or areas for which schemes have been published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939) shall be granted according to the provisions of the Act to all eligible applicants and there shall be no upper limit to the number of stage carriages for which permitsmway be granted.

By Order

Karnail Singh,

Sachiv.

II.

Notification

No. 241 T/XXX-4-15-P/79

Dated : January 23, 1981

The Governor being satisfied that it is expedient in the public interest so to do, is pleased to direct in exercise of the powers under Section 43-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Act No. 4 of 1939) that while considering applications for stage carriage permits, the State Transport Authority or a Regional Authority:

(i) shall have regard only to matters referred to in Clauses, (a), (b), (d) and (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 47 of the said Act and shall also take into consideration representations made by the local authority or police authority within whose jurisdiction any part of the proposed route or area lies, and

(ii) shall be deemed to have made sufficient compliance of the provisions of Sec. 57 of the said Act, if it intimates the particular of the applications to such local authority and police authority for making representations, if any, within a period of fifteen days from the date of despatch of the intimation with the stipulation that if no representation is received within the prescribed period of time, it shall be presumed that they have no representation to make, and has considered any representation made by such local authority and police authority.

By Order

Karnail Singh,

Sachiv."

2. The appellants who are stage carriage operators challenged the validity of the above Notifications in the writ petitions filed by them under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court inter alia on the ground that they were ultra vires the provisions of the Act under which they had been issued. The High Court dismissed the writ petitions after negativing the contentions of the appellants. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court the appellants have preferred these appeals by special leave as stated above.

3. It is necessary at this stage to give a resume of the relevant statutory provisions to understand the rival contentions of the parties. On finding that the Motor Vehicles Act, 1914 which was brought into force at an early stage of development of motor transport was inadequate to meet the new situation created by the growth of motor transport by the year 1939, the Central Legislature passed the Act for the purpose of regulating motor traffic in the interests alike of the safety and convenience of the public and of the development of a co-ordinated system of transport. The Act underwent major alterations in 1956 and 1969. Broadly the Act provided inter alia for registration of motor vehicles, licensing of drivers and conductors, grant of permits to ply public service vehicles and public carriers, operation of road transport service by State transport undertaking in