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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2723

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK SIBAL, SUKHVINDER KAUR, JJ.
State of Haryana & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Dabra Cooperative Transport Society Limited & Ors. – Respondents
LPA-475 of 2021 (O&M)
Decided On : 24-08-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the appellants in LPA Nos.475, 476 & 477 of 2021 and for the official respondents in LPA-480, 484-2021 and LPA-468-2022.
Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ravinder Rawal, Advocate and Ms. Nikita Garg, Advocate for the respondents in LPA-477-2021.
Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the appellants in LPA-480 and 484-2021 and for Respondent Nos.8-11, 13-15, 17-19, 22 and 25 in LPA-475-2021.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate; For the Appellantin LPA-468-2022 and for Respondent No.12 in LPA-475-2021.
Mr. B. S. Patwalia, Advocate and Mr. Akshit Pathania, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 in LPA-477-2021 and for the respondents in LPA-476-2021.
Mr. Rohit Kapoor, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 7 in LPA-475-20

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 99(1), 100(2), 102, 104, 87 - Stage Carriage Scheme, 2016 - The State of Haryana withdrew the 2016 scheme and sought to grant additional permits, which was challenged on grounds of legality and influence. (Paras 1-41)

(B) Statutory Powers and Administrative Discretion - The learned Single Judge held that the State surpassed its legal boundaries, resulting in invalid permits granted to private respondents through undue influence from the government. (Paras 11-14)

(C) Jurisdictional Limits - The court reiterated that the State's influence on transport authorities violates the independence of statutory bodies, undermining the legal framework provided in the Act. (Paras 26-29)

Facts of the case:
The State's decision to withdraw the 2016 scheme and reissue permits led to challenges from existing permit holders on grounds of legality and procedural adherence, resulting in appeals. (Paras 1-6)

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that permits were granted without legitimate authority, violating the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, resulting in interference with established transport authority independence. (Paras 14, 29-40)

Issues: (A) Whether the State was empowered to take the purported executive decision communicated via the memo dated 30.03.2020?

(B) Are the permits granted to the private respondents legally sustainable? (Paras 11-12)

Ratio Decidendi: The court found the State's actions legally untenable due to irregularities in the permit distribution process, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with statutory provisions. (Paras 26-32)

Result: All appeals dismissed.

Table of Content
1. state initiated transportation scheme legally challenged (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. supreme court directs procedural compliance in permit issuance (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. dispute over permit validity and government influence (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. learned single judge's findings on permit grants (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
5. arguments presented on behalf of state and private respondents (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
6. interference by government in permit-granting highlighted (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
7. supreme court reiterates independence of transport authorities (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
8. legal invalidity of temporary permits granted (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41)

JUDGMENT

Mr. Deepak Sibal, J.

These six intra court appeals have been taken up and are being decided together as they arise out of a common judgment dated 08.04.2021 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from LPA-475-2021 - State of Haryana v. The Dabra Coop. Transport Society Ltd. and others.

2. To provide for a coordinated road transport system, the State of Haryana, while exercising its powers under section 99(1) of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (for short - the Act) published a proposed scheme to which objections/ suggestions were invited. After considering the received objections/ suggestions, the State, in terms of Section 100(2) of the Act, through a notification dated 17.02.2017, published the final scheme. The final scheme was notified on 17.02.2017 but since the proposed or the draft scheme had been notified in the year 2016, the final scheme was commonly referred to as the Stage Carriage Scheme of 2016 (hereinafter also referred to as the 2016 scheme). Respondent Nos.1 to 7 applied for and were granted Stage Carriage Permits under the 2016 scheme. These permits were valid for 5 years.

3. The 2016 scheme was challenged before this Court through CWP No.5867-2017 - Nayabash Cooperative Transport Society Limited and others v. State of Haryana and others. On being put to notice the State filed an affidavit as per which it had reconsidered the entire matter and decided to withdraw the 2016 scheme as also to publish a fresh draft scheme; till the fresh scheme was finalized all permit holders under the 2016 scheme would be allowed to ply their buses on the allotted routes; the applicants who had already got their vehicles registered under the 2016 scheme on the portal of the Transport Department, Haryana, namely, Vahan would also be considered for the grant of permits and that this would be in addition to any other interested applicant whose case would also be considered in accordance with Section 102 of the Act.

4. After considering the afore stand taken by the State, this Court disposed of the writ petition on 16.05.2017 after observing that till the fresh scheme was notified, the 2016 scheme would continue to operate and that the State would also be at liberty to grant permits to the applicants who had already got themselves registered under the 2016 scheme on the portal of the Transport Department, Haryana.

5. On 20.06.2017 the State of Haryana notified a draft scheme (for reference - the draft 2017 scheme). Objections/ suggestions were invited to the draft 2017 scheme but before the said scheme could be finalized some parties who felt aggrieved by the aforesaid order of this Court dated 16.05.2017 filed an application before this Court seeking their impleadment as also review of the said order. The application was disposed of through order dated 21.07.2017 the operative part of which reads as under:-

"The writ petition along with other connected cases was initially filed seeking to challenge the notification dated 17.2.2017 notifying the Stage Carriage Scheme, 2016 for issuance of Stage Carriage Permits under the Act. As during the pendency of the writ petitions, the State decided to cancel the 2016 Scheme and issue a fresh draft modified scheme, the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top