The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority cannot levy fees over and above tax without quid pro quo, and the extension of existing route amounts to grant of a new permit only if the variation exceeds 24 kilometers from the terminus.

( 1 ) THESE writ petitioners stated that the resolution dated 26th March, 2002 was passed by the regional Transport Authority extending the permits of the petitioners on various dates on the condition that they shall pay additional tax at the enhanced rate. It is stated that the petitioners have been paying additional tax at the enhanced rate for the portion, for which they have been granted extension and they are operating their vehicles continuously for the last about one and half years uninterruptedly without any hindrance.

( 2 ) ON 31st May, 2003 the petitioners received demand notes dated 24th May, 2003 issued by the respondent No. 1, whereby the petitioners have been directed to deposit Rs. 4800/-, as fee for extension of the route, latest by 31st May, 2003. It was also mentioned in the demand notes that in the event of failure to deposit the said amount, the grant of extension in favour of the petitioners shall be stand cancelled automatically. Demand notes are impugned hereunder. According to the petitioners, no fee can be imposed as against any operators as there is no such provision in the statute. They have jointly submitted a representation and sought extension of time to deposit the sum but the Divisional Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur/ Chairman, regional Transport Authority declined to entertain the same.

( 3 ) THE petitioners made the writ petition showing urgency because of time bound programme on the part of the respondents. The petitioners had also no other alternative but to deposit the sum under threat. According to the petitioners, the operation of vehicles on public route is regulated under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 80 (3) of the said Act is as follows:

"80 (3 ). An application to vary the conditions of any permit, other than a temporary permit, by the inclusion of a new route or routes or a new area or by altering the route or routes or area covered by it, or in the case of a stage carriage permit by increasing the number of trips above the specified maximum or by the variation, extension or curtailment of the route or routes or the area specified in the permit shall be treated as an application for the grant of a new permit: provided that it shall not be necessary so to treat an application made by the holder of stage carriage permit who provides the only service on any route to increase the frequency of the service so provided without any increase in the number of vehicles: provided further that, (i) in the case of variation, the termini shall not be altered and the distance covered by the variation shall not exceed twenty-four kilometres; (ii) in the case of extension, the distance covered by extension shall not exceed twenty-four kilometres from the termini, and any such variation or extension within such limits shall be made only after the transport authority is satisfied that such variation will serve the convenience of the public and that it is not expedient to grant a separate permit in respect of the original route as so varied or extended or any part thereof. "

( 4 ) PETITIONERS contended that due to the need of travelling public they have applied for grant of extension of their routes so as to cover the portions from Rath to Khera and Orai to Jalaun. According to the petitioners, necessary fee can be charged from the operators only in view of the provisions contained under Rule 125 of the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1998. There is no other provision under the Act or Rules, under which fee can be levied for grant of extension of the route. Whenever extension was granted permitting the petitioners to run the vehicles on the extended route, nowhere it was mentioned that any fee shall be imposed and realised from the respective petitioners in lieu of grant of such extension. As per Article 265 of the constitution of India no tax can be collected except under the authority of law. Expression of "law" is given under Article 13 therein. Numerous