Back
1988 Supreme(Ker) 443
Judges : MALIMATH,BHASKARAN NAMBIAR
MOIDEENKUTTY - Appellant
Versus
STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - Respondent
Case No : W.A. No. 899 of 1988
Decided On : 11/23/1988
Advocates Appeared :
M.P.R. Nair; M.K. Chandramohan Das; For Appellant
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the date on which the R.T.A. takes the decision to open the route as the crucial date for measuring the distance, emphasizing the need for precision and specificity in defining the route.
Headnote:
Route Measurement - Motor Vehicles Act - S.57(2), R.177A(3), S.2(28A), S.46 - The court discussed the classification of routes and the relevant date for measuring the distance of the route, emphasizing the need for precision and specificity in defining the route. The judgment highlighted the importance of the date on which the Regional Transport Authority (R.T.A.) takes the decision to open the route as the crucial date for measuring the distance, disregarding subsequent events like traffic regulations. The court set aside the previous orders and remitted the case back to the R.T.A. for fresh disposal based on the observations made.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the grant of a stage carriage permit for a specific route, with the appellant and the 4th respondent both claiming equal merit for the permit. The controversy centered around the precise distance of the route and the date for measuring the distance, as it determined the entitlement to preference under R.177A(3) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the relevant date for measuring the distance of the route is the date on which the R.T.A. takes the decision to open the route, emphasizing the need for precision and specificity in defining the route. It set aside the previous orders and remitted the case back to the R.T.A. for fresh disposal based on the observations made.
Issues: The key issue was the determination of the precise distance of the route and the relevant date for measuring the distance, as it impacted the entitlement to preference under R.177A(3) of the rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The crucial date for measuring the distance of the route is the date on which the R.T.A. takes the decision to open the route, disregarding subsequent events like traffic regulations. Precision and specificity in defining the route are essential, and any subsequent alterations to the route should be considered only if they substantially affect the integrity of the route.
Final Decision: The court set aside the previous orders and remitted the case back to the R.T.A. for fresh disposal based on the observations made, allowing the appellant to continue operating on a temporary basis until the fresh disposal by the R.T.A. The R.T.A. was directed to expedite the disposal of the matter within three months.
1. This appeal is against the judgment of the learned single judge in O.P.No 6414 of 1988. The second respondent, the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram passed an order as per Ext.P1 on 23-5-1985 for the purpose of introduction of a stage carriage serviced for the route Kuttor North-Kozhikode via A.R. Nagar Kakkadumpuram Kunnumpuram-Kondotty and Ratnanattukara, it being satisfied that there is need for grant of a stage carriage permit for one trip. The said route is an inter-district route falling within the jurisdictions of the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram and the Regional Transport Authority, Kozhikode. In pursuance of that decision applications were invited under S.57 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act by notification dated 5-12-1985, published in the gazette dated the 21st of January 1986. The said notification is extracted as follows:
"In pursuance of the decision of the R. T. A., Malappuram dated 23-2-1985 the Secretary, R.T.A., Malappuram will receive applications till 30 days from the date of publication of this notification in the Kerala Gazette for the issue of pucca stage carriage permit for a vehicle to ply on the following route.
The application should be made in form P.S.P.A. and accompanied by chalan receipts for Rs. 57/-remitted under the head of account "041 (a) taxes on vehicles" and revenue deposit for Rs. 200/- under the head of account "Revenue Deposit". Belated and defective applications will not be entertained. In the case of Companies/ Partnership firms a copy of memoranda of Association/ Partnership deed also be produced along with application.
No.G2/2280/85/M 5th December, 1985.
Route:- Kuttor North-Kozhikode via A.R. Nagar-Kakkadumpuram-Kunnumpuram-Kondotty and Ramanattukara.
Sd/
Malappuram.
Secretary, Regional Transport Authority."
The appellant, the 4th respondent and several others applied for the grant of stage carriage permit in response to the said notification. The R. T. A. by its order Ext. P4 dated 17-5-1986 granted the permit in favour of the appellant, after coming to the conclusion that the route in question is a short route and that therefore the appellant who is a new entrant is entitled to preference under R.177A(3) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. The 4th respondent is admittedly not a new entrant and is an operator in respect of a medium route. The 4th respondent challenged the decision of the R. T. A. before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the R.T.A. as per Ext. P6 dated 1-10-1986. The R.T. A. after fresh consideration of the matter passed an order on 22-11-1986 as per Ext. P7 granting the permit in favour of the appellant after coming to the conclusion that the route in question is a short route and not a medium route as contended by the 4th respondent. The decision of the R.T.A., Malappuram was challenged by the 4th respondent in appeal before the S.T.A.T. The Tribunal by its order Ext. P16 dated 6-6-1988 allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the R.T.A. and remitted the case for fresh consideration in the light of the directions contained in Para.9, wherein the said authority is called upon to decide as to whether one way traffic at Calicut and traffic through byepass at Kondotty were made applicable on or before 17-6-1986. It is the said decision of the Tribunal that was challenged by the appellant in O.P. No. 6414/88. The learned single judge disposed of the writ petition observing that if as a matter of fact there is any error as contended by the appellant in Para.7 of the Tribunal, that is a matter which should be brought to the notice of the Tribunal, for appropriate rectification and that is not a matter which calls for interference in the writ petition. It is the said judgment that is challenged by the appellant in this appeal.
2. There is no dispute between the appellant on the one hand and the contesting 4th respondent on the other that they have equal merit for claiming grant of per
