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

1981 Supreme(AP) 30

S. SARDAR ALI – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, Government of India, NEW DELHI – Respondent


JEEVAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN these two Writ Petitions, the constitutional validity of Section 129-A of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, is questioned.

( 2 ) THE petitioners are holders and operators of All India Tourist omnibus permits granted by the State Transport Authority, under Section 63 (7) of the Act. These permits enable these vehicles, which are contract carriages as defined by the Act, to operate throughout the length and width of India. According to the petitioners, these permits were granted by each state in pursuance of a scheme evolved by the Central Government with a view to promote tourism in the country. For the State of Andhra Pradesh the number fixed is said to be 50 According to the Central Government Notification, the number of seats in the vehicle, the type of seats, and construction of the bus are all prescribed. The petitioners say that most of their vehicles are of the latest model, each costing about Rs. 4, 00. 000/- and that, some of them are even air-conditioned at an additional cost of Rs. 1,50, 000/- for each vehicle They say that the buses are provided with tape-recorders, fans, radios, and ice boxes etc. , since they are meant mostly for long-distance t





















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