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

1964 Supreme(SC) 269

M. HIDAYATULLAH, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. N. WANCHOO, J. R. MUDHOLKAR, RAGHUBAR DAYAL
Roshan Lal Gautham – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


M.HIDAYATULLAH, J.

(1) THE appellant who appeals by special leave against the judgment of the High court of Allahabad dated 30/03/1964 is the holder of a contract carriage permit granted to him by the Regional Transport Authority, Agra and valid till 1/02/1955. He owns a single contract carriage and his permit covers the whole of the Agra region which comprises the six districts of Mathura, Agra, Aligarh, Etah, Etawah and Mainpuri. No special routa or routes are indicated in his permit and the termini of his operation are the frontiers of this region on all sides. In 1955, the government of Uttar Pradesh purporting to act under Sec. 3 of the U. P. Road Transport Services (Development) Act, 1955, framed a scheme for nationalisation of transport services in Uttac Pradesh. The scheme which was then framed was struck down by an order of the High court of Allahabad on the petition of soma private operators. In 1955, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was amended by the introduction of Ch. IVA dealing with special provisions relating to State Transport Undertakings. This amendment was introduced by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1956 with effect from 16/02/1957. Afte














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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top