Back
1982 Supreme(AP) 441
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : CHENNAKESAVA REDDY, P.KODANDA RAMAYYA
V.NEERAJAKSHAMA NAIDU - Appellant
Versus
State TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, A.P. BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICER, PUNJAGUTTA, HYDERABAD - Respondent
W.A.No.313/77 & W.P.699/77
Decided On : 11-11-82
Advocates Appeared :
Mr. T. Venkataramana, Mr. C. Ananda Rao
Headnote:MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, Sec. 68-D and 68-F (2) and Motor Vehicle Rules, Rule 2(QQ)(iii) - Publication of scheme of Nationalisation of intra-State route Tirupati to Chittoor - Holder of a state carriage permit on the inter-state route covered by approved scheme is no, entitled to un shuttle trips between Tirupathi and Chittoor.
Held: The two termini on the nationalised route under G.O.Ms.No.1504, Home dated 17th November, 1973 are "Tirupati and Chittoor." The starting Point is Tirupathi. Under the scheme published the State Transport Undertaking has a right to operate to the complete exclusion of other persons on the route "Tirupati to Chittoor". The route Tirupathi to Chittor is an independent notified route. It is not part of intra-State route.
In this case the petitioner is not asked to stop the plying the bus on the inter-State route. He is only asked to stop forth with the two shuttle trified on the notified route "Tirupathi to Chittoor". The performance of shuttle trips is not a mere overlapping the notified route. On the other hand, it is one or operation on the notified route, which is totally prohibited by the scheme. Under the scheme, the State Transport undertaking has an exclusive right to operate on the notified rout Under Sec. 68-F(2) the Regional Transport Authority has power to curtail the area or route covered by the permit to give effect to the notified scheme in so far as such permit relates to the notified route.
W.A. & W.P. Dismissed
( 1 ) IN G. O. Ms. No. 1504, Home, dated 17th November, 1973 the state Government published the approved scheme under Section 68-D of the Motor Vechiles Act in respect of the intra-state notified route tirupathi to Clittoor . The approved scheme contained a note to the following effect : note :the scheme shall not affect (1) the holder of stage carriage permits in respect of the portions of the route; (2) the other State Transport Undertakings ; and (3) the existing permit holders of the stage carriage on inter- state routes overlapping the notified route subject to the condition that they shall not pick up or set down intra-state passengers on the notified route (4) xx xx xx
( 2 ) BY G. O. Ms. No. 775 (Home, Transport Department) dated 3rd June, 1975, the intra-state route tirupathi to Pathikonda was nationalised. It also contained the same Note as referred to in G. O. Ms. No, 1504, dt. 17th November, 1973.
( 3 ) SRI V. Neerajakshama Naidu of Cbittoor is a holder of a stage carriage permit on the intra-Statc route lirupathi to Mulbagal vis chittoor, Palamaner and Nangli. He was doing two single trips on the said route and two shuttle trips between Tirupathi snd Cbittoor. Since the condition of Note No. (3) adversely affected the operator, he challenged the same by way of writ Petition No. 7636 of 1973. The said writ petition was allowed by the Court on 15th March, 1974, and the words "subject to the condition that they shall not pick up or set dows intrastate passengers on the notified route" were struck down. Aggrieved against the said order of the learned single Judge, the State Transport undertaking filed an appeal. It was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 15th July, 1975. Subsequent to the decision of the learned single Judge, the Regional Transport Officer, Cbittoor, by his proceedings dated 2nd May, 1974 served a notice on the operator calling upon him to stop plying his bus on the shuttle trip "tirupathi to Chittoor" forthwith on the ground that the said route was covered by the aforementioned approved Scheme. The operator then filed Writ Petition 454 of 1976. This Court admitted the Writ Petition on 6th February, 1976 and granted interim suspension of the impugned order.
( 4 ) THE Deputy Transport Commissioner, Chittoor, by his proceedings dated 18th September, 1975, called upon the operator to stop forthwith the shuttle trip on the sector "tirupathi to Chittoor" on the ground that the Scheme approved in G. O. Ms. No. 775, dated 3rd June, 1975 relating to the route "tirupathi to Pathikonda" contemplates complete exclusion of other operators on the notified route other than those operating on inter-state routes and also operating on the portions of the notified routes. Aggrieed against the said order, the operator filed Writ Petition No. 699 of 1977. W. P. No. 454 of 1976 was heard by Jeevan Reddy, J. , and it was dismissed on 6th july, 1977. Therefore, the permit holder has filed Writ Appeal 313/77. Since the Writ Petition and the Writ appeal relate to curtailment of the extra shuttle trips between Tirupathi and Chittoor on the inter-State route "tirupathi to Mulbagal" and the questions that arise are common, both the cates are heard together.
( 5 ) THE question that requires consideration for the decision in the cases is whether the shuttle trip permuted between Tirupathi and Chittoor on the inter-State route "tirupathi to Mulbagal" is a part and parcel of the inter-State route Tirupathi to Mulbagal and not an independent route. It is, therefore, necessary to look at the notification of the approved scheme, and the meaning of the words "route" and "shuttle trip" as contemplated under the provisions of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988.
( 6 ) SEC. 68-C of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 contemplates preparation and publication of scheme of road transport service. Under the Scheme, a State Transport Undertaking may undertake to operate either to the complete exclusion or partial exclusio
