Judgement

NARASIMHAM, J. :- These are petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution by persons who were plying stage carriage vehicles (buses) for hire along certain routes in Ganjam district and whose permits have been cancelled with effect from 1-1-1951 in consequence of notification No. 35613 S. T. dated 21-9-1950 read with erratum No. 363669 S. T. dated 27-9-1950 issued by the State Govt. under S. 5, Orissa Motor Vehicles (Regulation of Stage Carriage and Public Carriers Services) Act, 1947 Orissa Act XXXVI (36) of 1947.

2. Sri Lokanath Misra the petitioner in M.J.C. No. 194 of 1950 is the owner of two buses Nos. O.R.G. 399 and 380. He was granted a permit No. 49/1 for three years from 21-4-1949 to 21-4-1952 for plying O.R.G. 380 over Odogan-Aska route in Ganjam district. He was granted another permit No. 39/1 in respect of O.R.G. 380 for a period of one year expiring on 19-11-1948 over Chirrikipada-Chatrapur route in the same district. But sometime in May 1948 that permit was validated for another vehicle bearing No. O.R.G. 399 and the route was extended to Berhampur and the duration of the permits was also extended to 30-10-1950. After the expiry of that permit in October 1950 he applied for its renewal but renewal was not granted though he was allowed to ply the bus over that route till 31-12-1950.

3. In M.J.C. No. 195 of 1950 the petitioner Sri Jami Biswanath Prusti was granted three permits for paying buses for hire on the routes specified below.

4. These permits were granted by the Regional Transport Authority under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act) and they would ordinarily have remained valid for the period for which they were issued but for the notification No. 35613 S. T. dated 21-9-1950 issued under S. 5, Orissa Motor Vehicles (Regulation of Stage Carriage and Public Carriers Services) Act, 1947 (Orissa Act XXXVI (36) of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the Subsidiary Act). The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the subsidiary Act is ultra vires the Constitution and consequently the notification issued thereunder is inoperative and cannot have the effect of cancelling the permits validly granted under the principal Act.

5. The principal Act was passed in 1939 and Chap. IV of that Act contains elaborate provisions for the grant of stage carriage permits to various persons authorising them to ply their buses for hire over certain specified routes and prescribing the procedure to be followed by the Regional Transport authorities in granting or refusing to grant such permits. Two classes of permits were contemplated in that Chapter : firstly, temporary permit which is valid for four months only under S. 62 and secondly, a regular permit which under S. 58 would remain valid for a period of not less than three years and not more than five years as may be directed by the Transport Authority. In granting or refusing to grant regular permits the Transport Authority were required to have regard to certain matters specified in S. 47. They were empowered by S. 58 to regulate the plying of buses by attaching some conditions to the permits, by limiting the number of buses in any route, and by fixing the timings of their arrival and departure. As the principal Act has not been challenged as ultra vires it is unnecessary for the purpose of this case to deal with these provisions at length. It is sufficient to note that Chap. IV of the principal Act aims at regulating the use of motor transport for hire in the interests of the safety and convenience of the public and also for the purpose of developing a co-ordinated system of transport. It did not contain express provisions for granting monopoly either over a specified route or over a specified area of the State or the whole of the State to a particular agency though it authorised the restriction of the number of vehicles. Sometime in 1946 the Govt. of Orissa took up for consideration the fo