The court affirmed that temporary taxi stand permits expire without renewal; reinstated rights must be governed by government notification per relevant statutes.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Kumar, J.

1) This intra-court appeal by Taxi Sumo Stand No.1, Mehandi Kadal, Anantnag, filed through its President Abdul Haq Bhat, is directed against an order and judgment dated 31st May, 2024, passed by learned Single Judge [Writ Court] of this Court in WP(C) No.282/2020 titled “Taxi Sumo Stand vs. UT of J&K & Ors.” whereby the Writ Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants.

2) The appellant is a motor transport undertaking registered with the Labour Department and Mr. Abdul Haq Bhat claims to be its President. In the year 2018, the Transport Commissioner vide notification No.50-MVD of 2018 dated 20th July, 2018, specified a place at Mehandi Kadal, Anantnag, to be used by the appellants as a stand for contract carriage (Taxi/Maxi Cabs). The appellants were permitted to park thirty vehicles which were specified in the aforesaid notification. This permission was to remain effective only for a period of one year subject to the validity of the agreement executed between the parties involved. The appellants have also placed on record a lease deed executed between Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Anantnag, and the appellant through it’s the then President and Secretary. The lease was valid for a period of three years. The appellant claims that ever since the Taxi Sumos’ attached to the appellant transport undertaking are operating from Stand No.1 Mehendi Kadal, Anantnag, without any obstruction or hindrance from any quarter, there has been no complaint by any person against their operation from the said taxi stand. It is the case setup by the appellants that till the year 2020, the Taxi Sumo Stand No.1 was being operated from Mehandi Kadal but on 3rd February, 2020, the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Anantnag, vide communication No.MC/ANG/20/974-81 called upon the appellant to shift TATA Sumo Stand from the present location i.e. DOB Stand Mehandi Kadal to Mehandi Kadal (New Bypass) adjacent to Police Station, Sadder, on the earmarked space immediately. The appellant felt aggrieved by the aforesaid communication inter and, accordingly, filed WP(C) No/282/2020 seeking, alia , Writ of Certiorari to quash the communication dated 3rd of February, 2020, issued by Municipal Council, Anantnag, and also for a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to shift the Taxi Sumo Stand No.1 Mehandi Kadal, Anantnag, from its present place of operation. The entire writ petition was premised on the ground that the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Anantnag, was not competent to order shifting of Taxi Sumo Stand, for the power to notify Taxi Stand and to shift Taxi stand from one place to another was vested in the Government or the authorized officer under Section 117 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The communication of Municipal Council, impugned in the writ petition, was also assailed on the ground that it had the effect of depriving the appellants of their livelihood and, therefore, violative of Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

3) The writ petition filed by the appellants was contested by the respondents. In the reply affidavit filed by Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, it was submitted that the order impugned in the writ petition was issued by the Executive Office, Municipal Council, Anantnag, with the consent of District Administration to decongest the traffic between Mehendi Kadal to Janglat Mandi. It was submitted that the unregulated flow of taxies/sumo’s from the existing stand through Anantnag was a single reason responsible for impeding the free movement of vehicular traffic and causing huge inconvenience to the publ