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

1993 Supreme(Raj) 479

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Jas Raj Chopra, J.
Bhera Ram & ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan & ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5105 of 1991.
Decided On : 26-02-1993

Headnote:

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - BUS STANDS AND HALTING PLACES - DETERMINATION - POWERS OF REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY OR DISTRICT COLLECTOR - MUNICIPAL BOARD - NO JURISDICTION - USE OF MUNICIPAL LAND BY PRIVATE BUS OPERATORS WITHOUT PAYMENT OF FEES OR HALTING CHARGES - CONTRARY TO RULES - PROHIBITION BY MUNICIPAL BOARD - JUSTIFIED - WRIT PETITION DISMISSED.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, holders of non-temporary stage carriage permits, challenged resolutions of Municipal Board restraining them from using Bus Stand at Katla Chowk and suggesting them to halt their buses at the side of Tent House.

Finding of the Court:

1. Regional Transport Authority or District Collector & District Magistrate can only fix a bus stand or a halting place and this power is not vested in the Municipal Board. 2. Municipal Board has no jurisdiction to pass a resolution restraining the petitioners and other Operators to use the Bus-stand situated in Katla Chowk. 3. Petitioners are not obliged to use any new place as bus-stand and the respondents cannot compel them to use the new place as bus-stand. 4. Municipal Board is competent to order any person not to use a place for a particular trade if it is likely to cause nuisance or danger to public life. 5. Katla Chowk was not a notified bus-stand and the petitioners were unathorisedly halting their buses in Katla Chowk causing nuisance to the public as also danger to the life. 6. Municipal Board is well within its powers to prohibit the Private Bus- Operators to make use of Katla Chowk as Bus-stand or a halting place because the use of Katla Chowk as a Bus-stand or a halting place causes nuisance to the public at large and it is hazardous to public safety and prone to accidents.

Issues: 1. Whether the Municipal Board has the jurisdiction to specify any place as a bus-stand? 2. Whether the Municipal Board can pass any order for the shifting of the parking and halting place from Katla Chowk to a place near Tent House? 3. Whether the petitioners have any right to use Katla Chowk as a bus-stand or a halting place?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The provisions of sections 96 (2) (xxi) and 117 of the Motor Vehicles Act are in pari materia with the provisions of sections 68(r) and 76 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. 2. Only the RTA or the District Collector cum District Magistrate can specify a particular place as a bus stand or a halting place by notification in the Official Gazette and, therefore, the Municipal Board has no authority whatsoever to designate any place as a halting place or a bus stand. 3. If a particular place is not notified as a bus stand or a halting place either by the District Collector cum District Magistrate or by the RTA, it does not mean that the private bus-operators have been given an authority to decide a particular place as a halting place. 4. The Municipal Board being an elected body is required to decide what will serve the best interest of the people at large of the locality. Thus, if the Municipal Board has taken a particular decision in the interest of the people at large and to ensure safety then that decision has to be given due weight. 5. When Private Bus-operators are unauthorisedly using that Chowk as a halting or parking place, though the land belongs to the Municipal Board and that land has not been notified as a Bus-Stand or halting place either by the District Collector cum District Magistrate or by the RTA then no right is conferred on the Private Bus-Operators to claim any right over this land.

Final Decision: Writ petitions dismissed.

JUDGMENT

1. - These three writ petitions, although separately filed by a number of persons jointly, are directed against the resolutions of the Municipal Board, Nokha (Annexure-1) dated 5.7.1991 concerning agenda items No. 11 and 12, where by the petitioners were restrained from using the Bus Stand at Katla Chowk and it was suggested to them to halt their buses at the side of Tent House situated in the northern side of the Bus-Stand.

2. It is alleged that petitioners of Writ Petition No. 5105 of 1991 are the holders of non-temporary stage carriage permits on Nokha to Dharnok route and the petitioners of Writ Petition No 5280 of 1991 are the holders of non-temporary stage carriage permits on Nokha to Bhojas route. The petitioners of Writ Petition No. 5281 of 1991 are the holders of non-temporary stage carriage permits on Nokha to Karnau route. As these three writ petitions raise common questions of law and facts, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order/judgment.

3. For the convenient disposal of these three writ petitions, it will be appropriate to notice the facts of Writ Petitions No. 5280 of 1991 filed by petitioners Bhagwanaram and Others because it is this writ petition, where not only a reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents but a rejoinder and a return to the rejoinder have also been filed. Of course, reply to the writ petition has been filed in other two writ petitions also almost on the same line but rejoinder and return to the rejoinder have been filed only in the writ petition filed by petitioners Bhagwanaram and Others and, therefore, it will be useful to notice the facts of that case.

4. It is alleged that Nokha Town is a centre of number of Bus- routes operating from and via Nokha. There are two Bus-stands, one is on the western side and the other is on the eastern side of the town. The bus-stand situated on the western side of the town is located in Katla Chowk. It is alleged that the road which approaches this Katla Chowk is nearly 200' wide and the buses plying on Nokha to Chaddi, Nokha to Dharnok, Nokha to Kolayat and Nokha to Jaimalsar routes etc. operate from this Bus Stand. This bus-stand is situated there for the past about 30 years and it is very convenient for use by the people. On account of the density of population, market situation and the situation of important Public Offices, the passengers can conveniently board the buses from this bus-stand and, therefore, it serves pubic purpose, if this Bus-stand is allowed to continue there.

5. It was contended that in view of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force with effect from 1.9.1988, Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990 were framed and they were brought into force with effect from 30.6.1990. R. 5.58 of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rues, 1990 (for short 'the Rules') provides that the Regional Transport Authority or District Collector & District Magistrate by notification in the Rajasthan Gazette, or by the erection of traffic signs, which are permitted for the purpose under sub-s. (1) of section 116 of the Act, or both, may, in respect of the taking up or setting down of passengers or both, by pubic service Vehicles or by any specified class of public service vehicles : (i) conditionally or unconditionally prohibit the use of any specific place or of any place of a specified nature or class, or (ii) require that within the limits of any municipality or within such other limits, as may be specified in the notification, certain specified stands or halting places only shall be so used, provided that no place which is privately owned shall be so notified except with the previous consent in writing of the owner thereof. Thus, as per r.5.58 of the Rules, the Regional Transport Authority or the District Collector & District Magistrate can only fix a bus stand or a halting place and this power is not vested in the Municipal Board and, therefore, the Municipal Board has no ju





























































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top