HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vijay Bishnoi, J.
Shri Anil Bhati – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13693/2020 Connected with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11417/2020, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11452/2020, , S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13683/2020, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13684/2020, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13685/2020, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13690/2020, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13696/2020, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 32/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 39/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 57/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 61/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 97/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 98/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 99/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 114/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 116/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 119/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 122/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 123/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 125/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 136/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 137/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 161/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 162/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 164/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 473/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 479/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 549/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 569/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 647/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 734/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 783/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 786/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 787/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 789/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 791/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 793/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1007/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1311/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1318/2021, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1452/2021
Decided On : 18-10-2022
Stage Carriage Permits - Transport Authorities - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 71(3), Mahendra Lodha v. State of Rajasthan, Mithilesh Garg and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Kalyan Chakrabarty
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed writ petitions against the transport authorities for not issuing fresh stage carriage permits to operate city buses on City Bus Route No.15 + 15 A in Jodhpur. The authorities rejected the applications citing sufficient public transport, traffic congestion, and pollution concerns.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the preliminary objection of maintainability and proceeded to decide the writ petitions on merits. The court found that the transport authorities were justified in refusing to issue new stage carriage permits based on the existing traffic conditions and pollution concerns.
Issues: The issues involved the rejection of applications for stage carriage permits, the jurisdiction of the transport authorities, and the impact on traffic congestion and pollution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the transport authorities can refuse permit applications based on relevant factors, and the restrictions on permits are justified considering traffic conditions and pollution concerns.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed, and the stay petitions were also dismissed.
JUDGMENT
1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners being aggrieved with the action of the respondent - transport authorities of not issuing fresh stage carriage permits to operate city buses on City Bus Route No.15 + 15 A in the city of Jodhpur.
2. Since, the controversy involved in these writ petitions is identical, the facts of SBCWP No.13693/2020 - Shri Anil Bhati v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. are taken into consideration for adjudicating the dispute.
3. The petitioner has filed an application on 5.4.2018 before the respondent No.2 - the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur Region, Jodhpur for grant of one stage carriage permit to operate city bus on City Bus Route No.15 + 15 A, which came to be disposed of by the respondent No.2 vide order dated 31.5.2019 while observing that since sufficient number of public transport is available on the aforesaid route; there is no demand from the public at large to raise stage carriage permits; taking into consideration the prevalent traffic load and as there is no vacancy available, the application for issuance of additional/fresh stage carriage permit filed by the petitioner is liable to be rejected. The respondent No.2 has also observed that as per the order dated 27.2.2007 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in DBCWP No.6073/1993 - Mahendra Lodha v. State of Rajasthan, the number of permits to the city buses cannot be issued more than 250 as per the observations made by the National Green Tribunal, Central Zone Bench, Bhopal in Application No.49/2014 about increasing pollution in the city of Jodhpur, it is not advisable to issue fresh stage carriage permits on the concerned city bus routes.
4. Being aggrieved with the rejection of the application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 31.5.2019, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, however, the said appeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.2.2020 (Annex.7).
5. Being aggrieved with the orders dated 31.5.2019 and 28.2.2020 passed by the respondent Nos.2 and 4 respectively, the petitioners have preferred these writ petitions.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the action of the respondents of rejecting petitioners' applications for issuance of additional/fresh stage carriage permits on City Bus Route No.15 + 15A is absolutely illegal. It is further argued that the Division Bench of this Court in Mahendra Lodha's case (supra) has restrained the number of permits up to 250 on the route in question, but as a matter of fact, against 250 permits, only 216 permits are in operation and, as such, vacancies are available, but the respondents have illegally rejected the applications filed by the petitioners while holding that no vacancy is available.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988'), no limit for grant of permits can be fixed under the said Act. It is argued that Sub-section (3) of Section 71 of the Act of 1988 provides that the State Government could not exercise the function of limiting operation of vehicles by fixing the number of the same unless the Central Government forms an opinion in this regard.
8. It is argued that in the instant case, the Central Government has not formed any opinion with regard to number of such vehicles and, therefore, the action of the respondent Nos.2 and 4 of not granting stage carriage permits to the petitioners is absolutely illegal and without jurisdiction. It is submitted that in the absence of necessary statistics, the respondent - transport authorities cannot be allowed to reject the applications of the petitioners for grant of stage carriage permits merely by saying that there is no vacancy of permit and the route is adequately served by existing operators and further grant of permit will lead to congestion. It is further argued that the need of increase in permits on the concerned city b
The transport authorities can refuse permit applications based on relevant factors such as traffic conditions and pollution concerns.
Having a permit under the scheduled caste category does not disqualify a candidate from applying for another permit in other routes under the same category of reservation.
Suo motu applications for stage carriage route permits impermissible without prior route notification and publication; authorities must strictly adhere to procedural rules and binding precedents to p....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the adherence to the Motor Vehicle Act, relevant notifications, and the authority's compliance with the legal framework in issuing and cancellin....
The authority may modify transportation permits for traffic management without violating fundamental terms, and such modifications are legally justified if properly reasoned.
The Regional Transport Authority cannot impose time limits on stage carriage permits under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.