Back
2000 Supreme(SC) 1329
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ranbir Singh
Vs.
State of Haryana
Decided on August 11, 2000
Permits granted under a reciprocal agreement must comply with the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, including publication in the official gazette.
Headnote:
Permits - Inter-State Route - Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Summary: The court found that the permits for the inter-State route were granted under a reciprocal agreement between two States, but the agreement was not published in the official gazette as required by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The court directed the appellant to apply afresh for the route, and the respondent to consider the application in accordance with the law.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant operated in the inter-State route between Bhadra-Hisar via Adampur falling in two States, State of Rajasthan and State of Haryana. Permits were granted under a reciprocal agreement between the two States, but the agreement was not published in the official gazette as required by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the permits were granted under an agreement that was not published as required by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The court directed the appellant to apply afresh for the route, and the respondent to consider the application in accordance with the law.
Issues: Validity of permits under the reciprocal agreement, Compliance with the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939
Ratio Decidendi: Permits granted under a reciprocal agreement must comply with the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, including publication in the official gazette. Failure to comply may necessitate reapplication for the route.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the appeals, directing the appellant to apply afresh for the route, and the respondent to consider the application in accordance with the law.
( 1 ) LEAVE granted.
( 2 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
( 3 ) THE initial grievance of the appellant was that the appellant is an operator in the inter-State route between Bhadra- Hisar via Adampur falling in two States, State of Rajasthan and State of Haryana. A reciprocal agreement was entered into between the two States and both the States, in pursuance to the same, granted permits. Under the said agreement, a number of services were increased in order to provide better facilities. The permits were granted under the same but the said reciprocal agreement was not published in the official gazette under Sections 63 (a) and 63 (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. And also the State of Haryana had not countersigned the permits. During the pendency of the writ petition in the High Court, the strength of the aforesaid routes were increased. Looking into this fact with the passage of time, we feel it is proper for the appellant to apply afresh, if so advised, for the said route. We have no hesitation in case the appellant applies for the said route, the respondent will consider the same in accordance with law and dispose it of preferably within the period of three months from the date this order is communicated to the authority concerned.
( 4 ) WITH the said observations, the appeals are disposed of. Costs on the parties.
