( 1 ) THIS Writ Appeal is preferred by the A. P. State Road Transport corporation against the judgment and order of a learned single Judge allowing the writ petition filed by Respondents 1 to 47. The writ petition was filed questioning the validity of Draft Schemes Nos. 2/88 to 52/88, published in the A P. Gazette Extraordinary, Part-II, dated 7-10-1988. The impugned draft Schemes were framed by the appellant-Corporation and published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned single Judge quashed the said Draft Schemes on the ground that they are completely foreign and alien to the object and scheme of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Schemes are also held to be vague and illegal. In particular, it is held that the Schemes are contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, including tbe proviso to Section 42 of the Act.

( 2 ) SINCE all the impugned schemes are identicil, it would be sufficient if we refer to one of the schemes, viz. , Draft Scheme No. 2/88. A copy of the said Scheme is annexed to this judgment. A reading of the Scheme discloses the following features : (I) The appellant-Corporation, which is a State Transport Under-taking, has formed the opinion that for the purpose of providing an efficient, adequate, economical, and properly co-ordinated road transport service, it is necessary in the public interest that the road transport services in relation to the area/routes specified in scheduled-I thereunder should be run and operated by the appellant-Corporation. (II) Schedule-I mentions as many as six routes in relation to which the Scheme is proposed, while Schedule-II mentions the various intermediate stages, and length of each of the said six routes.

( 3 ) COLUMN 3 is important, and the main attack of the writ-petitioners is directed against it. It reads thus :"3. Whether town service Town Service Stage Carriage or mofussil service, or with authorisation to use both : stage carriages as contract carriages for operating exclusive trips to schools, colleges, offices, Industrial establishments, etc. . . . . . ".

( 4 ) COLUMN 4 mentions the maximum and minmum number of vehicles to be operated on the said routes, while Column 5 relates to the maximum and minimum number of trips proposed to be performed on each of the said routes. Column 5 shows that a large number of trips are to be performed on route-A mentioned in Schedule-I, and that on the other five routes the number of trips are comparatively far less. Note 2 appended to the scheme expressly saves holders of Contract-carriage permits.

( 5 ) A reading of the Scheme shows that it has been framed by the ap pellant-Corporation with a view to enable it to ply certain number of vehicles as stage-carriages on route A, i. e. , Kushaiguda to Koti, with authorisation to use the same stage-carriages as contract-carriages on routes b to f . It is undoubtedly a new type of scheme ; a composite scheme. Actually no private stage carriage operators are plying on route-A ). For a proper appreciation of the nature of the scheme, it is necessary to refer a few facts preceding, and leading to, the framing of the impugned Schemes.

( 6 ) SEVERAL public sector Corporations and other companies have their factories and establishments on the outskirts of the City. The workers and employees working therein reside in the City. The managements of these factories/institutions have undertaken to transport them from specified points in the city to the factories/institutions, and to transport them back after the work hours. For this purpose, the managements have been engaging contract-carriages owned by private operators. The A. P. State Road transport Corporation also wanted to undertake the said transport. It appears to have entered into agreements with some of the managements and started plying its vehicles for transporting their employees. The private operators did not relish this competition. They soon found out that the a. P. S. R. T. C. had not obtain