K. Vinod Chandran, J.

1. The impugned judgment in the above appeal upheld the Government Order, Exhibit P5, wherein it was decided not to issue stage carriage permit to vehicles having four wheels as distinguished from those having six wheels. In fact, as early as in the year 2003, the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram; within whose jurisdiction the appellant's bus plies, issued order dated 18.02.2003 of a similar nature considering the topography of the area and the winding roads with sharp curves and steep gradients. This was issued in public interest, more specifically considering the fact that major share of the road accidents in the district was caused by stage carriages having only four wheels.

2. The stage carriage operators were up in arms, before this Court in a writ petition and then a writ appeal, wherein both the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench concurred with the view that Section 113(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") gives ample power to the State Government to prescribe conditions and issue orders of general application throughout the State or for specified areas. However, the Division Bench, noticing the fact that the operators were not heard before taking such a decision and that no enquiry was conducted before the passing of the said order, felt that the State Government has to look into the matter rather than the Regional Transport Authority.

3. While directing the State Government to look into the matter by Exhibit P3 judgment dated 21.10.2004, considering the seriousness of the issue as also the expediency required, the Division Bench had directed that the Government should consider the entire matter and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of that judgment. It was also directed that the order to replace four wheel vehicles with six wheel vehicles shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three months.

4. It is a matter of dismay that the Government slept over the matter for long. Only in 2011, the Government came out with Exhibit P5 order with directions as stated above. The batch of writ petitions was disposed of by the learned Single Judge and the appellant before us alone is in appeal.

5. The appellant contends that his vehicle is entitled to be operated for 15 years, i.e., till 2016, and the regular permit issued in the route Padaparamba -Malappuram is valid upto 11.07.2012. The appellant also contends that the State Government does not have power to prescribe such condition for the entire State under Section 113(1) of the Act.

6. We have to notice that, in the earlier round of litigation the various persons operating stage carriages as also the Association representing such operators had conceded the power of the State Government under Section 113(1) of the Act. There, however, the order was issued by the Regional Transport Authority and without hearing the Bus Operators' Association; which consideration alone weighed with the Division Bench when directing the appropriate Government to consider the matter afresh. Nevertheless, we look at Section 113(1), which is extracted hereunder:

"Sec.113. Limits of weight and limitations on use.-(1) The State Government may prescribe the conditions for the issue of permits for (Transport Vehicles) by the State or Regional Transport Authorities and may prohibit or restrict the use of such vehicles in any area or route.

(2) xxx

(3) xxx

(4) xxx".

Obviously, the statute has conferred powers on the State Government to prescribe the conditions for the issue of permits for transport vehicles by the State or Regional Transport Authorities and further conferred powers to prohibit or restrict the use of such vehicles in any area or route. There is no mandate that only a particular area or route should be imposed with such restriction or that the conditions of all the routes in the State should be gone into before imposing such conditions. By the specifi