Back
R.SURESH KUMAR
Madurai District Private Bus Owners Association Rep. by its Secretary – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways, New Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petitions challenge multiple notifications. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. some writ petitions deemed infructuous. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. petitioners argue against user fees based on frequent highway use. (Para 12 , 18 , 20 , 22 , 25) |
| 4. argument relating to distinction between fee and tax. (Para 36 , 42 , 46 , 90) |
| 5. court acknowledges need for fee modification for public buses. (Para 80 , 84 , 112) |
| 6. court dismisses writ petitions but allows modification of fee structure. (Para 118) |
ORDER :
(Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.15449 of 2020 : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent made in Notification bearing S.O.No.2382(E), published in the Government of India Gazette, dated 05.07.2019 by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi, for collection of the user fee in respect of section Trichy – Thuvarankurichi – Melur – Madurai, which forms part of NH45B and quash the same and direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to collect the user fee, as
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
