Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Bose
SATYA NARAYAN TRANSPORT CO. LTD. - Appellant
Versus
SECRETARY, STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, WEST BENGAL - Respondent
Civil Revn. 1537 Of 1956
Decided On : MARCH 06, 1957
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1939 - Section 47 - Section 57(7) - Section 64 - MOTOR VEHICLES RULES, 1940 - Rule 57(a) - Grant of stage carriage permit - Regional Transport Authority (RTA) granting permit to a political sufferer on extraneous consideration - Appellate Sub-Committee upholding RTA's order - Held, RTA's order is invalid and quashed - Appellate Sub-Committee's order is also quashed as it mechanically applied Rule 57(a) without considering whether other conditions were equal.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a private limited company, was granted a stage carriage permit by the RTA in 1954. Respondent No. 6, Kalinagar Bus Association, appealed against the order, and the Appellate Sub-Committee set aside the RTA's order and directed it to dispose of the matter in accordance with the Motor Vehicles Act. Fresh applications were invited by the RTA, and the petitioner's application was rejected in favor of Respondent No. 5, a political sufferer. The petitioner appealed to the Appellate Sub-Committee, which upheld the RTA's order. The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders of the RTA and the Appellate Sub-Committee.
Finding of the Court:
1. Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act is not exhaustive, and the RTA can take into consideration other matters which are allied or germane to the question to be decided. 2. The fact that Respondent No. 5 is a political sufferer and is badly in need of some provisions is an extraneous and irrelevant consideration and cannot be taken into account by the RTA in granting a stage carriage permit. 3. The RTA's order dated 6th January 1956 is invalid as it is based on extraneous consideration and does not satisfy the requirement of Section 57(7) of the Act. 4. The petitioner, by not raising the ground of extraneous consideration before the Appellate Sub-Committee, has precluded itself from attacking the RTA's order on this ground in the present petition. 5. The Appellate Sub-Committee's order dated 21st May 1956 is bad on the face of it as it has obviously misunderstood and misapplied Rule 57(a) of the Motor Vehicles Rules to the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Rule 57(a) of the Motor Vehicles Rules is not ultra vires the Constitution as it does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
Issues: 1. Whether the RTA can take into consideration extraneous and irrelevant considerations in granting a stage carriage permit. 2. Whether the RTA's order dated 6th January 1956 is invalid. 3. Whether the petitioner is precluded from attacking the RTA's order on the ground of extraneous consideration in the present petition. 4. Whether the Appellate Sub-Committee's order dated 21st May 1956 is bad on the face of it. 5. Whether Rule 57(a) of the Motor Vehicles Rules is ultra vires the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act is not exhaustive, and the RTA can take into consideration other matters which are allied or germane to the question to be decided. However, such considerations must not be extraneous or irrelevant to the subject matter. 2. The fact that Respondent No. 5 is a political sufferer and is badly in need of some provisions is an extraneous and irrelevant consideration and cannot be taken into account by the RTA in granting a stage carriage permit. 3. The RTA's order dated 6th January 1956 is invalid as it is based on extraneous consideration and does not satisfy the requirement of Section 57(7) of the Act. 4. The petitioner, by not raising the ground of extraneous consideration before the Appellate Sub-Committee, has precluded itself from attacking the RTA's order on this ground in the present petition. 5. The Appellate Sub-Committee's order dated 21st May 1956 is bad on the face of it as it has obviously misunderstood and misapplied Rule 57(a) of the Motor Vehicles Rules to the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Rule 57(a) of the Motor Vehicles Rules is not ultra vires the Constitution as it does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
Final Decision: The petition is allowed. The orders dated 6th January 1956 and 21st May 1956 are quashed. A writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the said orders is issued.
( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for writs in the nature of Certiorari and Prohibition for quashing of an order made by the Appellate Sub-Committee of the State Transport Authority, West Bengal dated the 21st May 1956 modifying an order of the Regional Transport Authority dated the 6th January, 1956 in respect of grant of certain stage carriage permits under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 and also for prohibiting the respondents from giving effect to the said order.
( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a Private Limited Company registered under the Indian Companies Act. There are three members of the Company who are brothers, viz. , Hari Charan Metia, who is a Driver Mechanic, Sushil Chandra Metia. who is also a Driver Mechanic and Bankim Chandra Metia. who is the Managing Director of the said Company. Since the incorporation of the Company on the 29th May, 1949 the petitioner has been plying stage carriages on permits granted under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act In different routes on Tamluk-Norghat and Tamluk-Terapekhia. Pursuant to a notice dated the 28th-March. 1953 published in the local weekly paper 'pradip' applications were invited from Companies and from Co-operative Societies for two stage carriage permits for Norghat-Kalinagar route. Such applications were to be submitted by the 15th April, 1953. On 20th April. 1953 a notice dated the 18th April, 1953 was published in the said weekly paper 'pradip' intimating that applications from twenty two concerns for two stage carriages had been received by the office of the Regional Transport Authority and by the said notice representations were also invited under 8. 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939. The petitioner Company submitted one application for stage carriage permit and Kalinagar Bus Association, the respondent No. 6 in this application, submitted two applications. On the 25th February, 1954 the Regional Transport Authority. Midnapore, at a meeting resolved to grant one stage carriage permit in favour of the petitioner Company and the other to Messrs. Jagatdhatri Transport Ltd. As these were according to the Regional Transport Authority the most- suitable candidates for getting the permits the resolution was to grant stage carriage permits for a period of three years. On 15th March. 1954 a stage carriage permit valid up to 24th February, 1957 was granted in favour of the petitioner Company for plying a stage, carriage on the Katinagar-Norghat route. The respondent No. 6, Kalinagar BUR Association, thereafter preferred an appeal against the order of the Regional Transport Authority dated the 25th February, 1954 to the State Transport Authority, West Bengal. On 16th August. 1954 the Chairman of the Appellate Subcommittee of the State Transport Authority passed the following order :"the Sub-Committee perused the record and heard the learned Advocates of the appellant and respondents. The Sub-Committee found that the Regional Transport Authority, Midnapore. have not recorded any reason or grounds for rejecting the application of the appellant either in the minutes of the meeting or in the report to the Committee and had not complied with the provisions, of Section 57 (7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, in view of the above circumstances, the Sub-Committee set aside the order appealed against and directed the Regional Transport Authority to dispose of the matter in due compliance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules framed thereunder. "
( 3 ) IT appears that thereafter the Regional Transport Authority invited new applications for the grant of permit in Norghat-Kalinagar route. Such invitation was made by a notice dated the 14th February, 1955 which was published in the said weekly paper 'pradip'. On 28th March. 1955 another notice was published in the said weekly paper inviting representations under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act and intimating that fifty t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
