The court established that the authorities under the Motor Vehicles Act have the power to prescribe conditions for permits, including the model or age of a vehicle, even without a notification by the Central Government under Section 59.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, questioning the correctness of an order made in Writ Petition No. 38181 /92 on 6/08/1993. By the said order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition questioning the correctness of the conditions imposed for grant of a permit, however modifyingthe said order to certain extent in regard to the age of vehicle that could be covered by a permit granted under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

( 2 ) THE appellant applied for grant of a stage carriage permit. The R. T. A. , Mangalore, granted permit subject to certain conditions including that the petitioner shall produce the documents of 1985 or later model vehicle within 30 days from the date of receipt of the proceedings. The matter was carried in appeal to the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal contending that the condition imposed in regard to the age of the vehicle was illegal. The appeal was allowed and the resolution of the R. T. A. was modified to the effect that the appellant shall be granted permit in respect of a 1983 model vehicle subject to the condition of replacing the said vehicle by a less than 10 years old vehicle as and when the vehicle covered by the permit becomes 10 years old from the date of initial registration which shall be a condition of the permit. Correctness of this order was called in question in the question in the writ petition.

( 3 ) THE learned Single Judge took the view that under Section 72 (2) of the Act, R. T. A. can grant a permit for a stage carriage of a 'specified description' and the expression 'specified description' would include the year of manufacture also and to reach this conclusion relied upon, the decision of the Supreme Court in AIR 1980 SC 800 Subhash Chandra v. State of Uttar Pradesh and several other decisions. The learned Single Judge rejected the contention of the petitioner that Section 59 of the Act militates against imposing conditions under Section 72 (2) of the Act so as to prescribe the age limit in regard to the vehicles to be covered by permits. Being of the view that Section 59 provides that the Central Government may, having regard to the public safety, convenience and objects of the Act, specify the life of a motor vehicle reckoned from the date of its manufacture, after the expiry of which the motor vehicle shall not be deemed to comply with the requirements of the Act held that the purpose of Section 59 is to fix the life of a vehicle for the purpose of issues of certificate of registration; while Section 72 is in relation to grant of permits in respect of different kinds of vehicles including a stage carriage.

( 4 ) BEFORE us, two questions are raised for consideration: (1) Whether the authorities acting under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 have the power to prescribe a particular model or age of a vehicle to be used as a stage carriage service under a permit in the absence of a Notification being issued by the Central Government in exercise of the power under Section 59 of the Act? (2) Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in departing from the earlier view in this regard?

( 5 ) ON the first question, it is submitted that under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the 1939 Act') there was no provision similar to Section 59 of the Act and under Section 24 (4) of the 1939 Act the power to fix the period for validity of certificate was mentioned and it would be period of 15 years from the date of issue of certificate and the same could also be renewed. However, under Section 59 of the Act, it is the Central Government which has been empowered to fix the age limits for different classes of vehicles. It is urged that the learned Single Judge did not take into consideration that a certificate of registration issued under Section 46 of the Act would be effective throughout India and the same is not required to be registered in any other State. U