G.BIKSHAPATHY
A. NARAYANA RAO – Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, SECUNDERABAD – Respondent
( 1 ) IN all these writ petitions common questions of law are involved and hence, therefore they are decided by a common judgment.
( 2 ) THE question that arises for consideration in all these writ petitions iswhether any permission of the authorities is required for reducing the seating capacity in the contract carriage vehicles.
( 3 ) THE factual matrix in the nutshell is that the petitioners are owning thelight Motor Vehicles having seating capacity of more than 6 excluding the driver. In some cases, the petitioners have purchased the vehicles from the manufacturers which are having seating capacity of more than 6 passengers excluding the driver. They intend to run the vehicles as contract carriages and also under All India Tourist Taxi Cab Permits under Section 88 (9) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The stand of the petitioners is that they have effected necessary adaptions in the seating arrangement by reducing the seating to 6 excluding the driver so as to give better tourist facilities and that they may be permitted to adopt the seating capacity of 7 in all to run under All India tourist Motor Cab Permits or contract carriages as the case may be. Some of the app
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.