ORDER

Mohd Hamid Husain, J. - This is a reference made by Sri B.G. Jainhari, Temp. Sessions Judge, Mathura, recommending to this Court that the Government Order No. 2813/6-285/1967 dated 9-10-1967 offends Article 14 of the Constitution of India and is also in excess of the powers conferred u/s 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and therefore, the aforesaid Government Order be struck down as illegal and unconstitutional.

2. The facts giving rise to the reference are, that Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava, a Magistrate 1st Class at Agra was appointed by the aforesaid Government Order, a Regional Transport Magistrate empowered to try cases for the infringement of the provisions of the UP Passenger Tax Act in respect of six districts, namely, Agra, Mathura, Mainpuri, Aliarh, Bulandshahr and Etah and Sri S.P. Srivastava was required to try at Agra, the cases pertaining to the districts of Agra, Mathura and Mainpuri. The Applicant Jain Transport and General Trading Company, Mathura, was prosecuted for contravening the provisions of the UP Passenger Tax Act on Mathura-Goverdhan Road in the district of Mathura. On 21-9-1968 an application was presented by the Applicant before the Regional Transport Magistrate, Agra, objecting to the holding of the trial in respect of the offence at Agra instead of at Mathura and the prayer in the application was to the effect that:

It is, therefore, prayed that this learned court be pleased to throw out the case for want of jurisdiction.

On this application the following order was passed on the same date:

In view of the G.O. No. 2813/6-285/1967 dated 9-10-67 this Court is empowered to hear cases of Mathura district at Agra under UP Passenger Tax Act. The application is, therefore, rejected.

Sd. Illegible 21--9 R.T.M. Agra.

Against this order the Applicant went up in revision to the Sessions Judge, Mathura, who has referred the same to this Court with his recommendation for holding the Government Order invalid as it offends Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

3. The learned Sessions Judge is of the opinion that since the Government Order does not disclose the reasons which prompted the Governor to issue the said order and deviating from the normal procedure as contemplated in Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Sessions Judge has relied on a decision reported in The State of West Bengal Vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar, AIR 1952 SC 75 , This decision of the Supreme Court was considered in the case reported in M.K. Gopalan and Another Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 362 and therein it was observed that the view taken in The State of West Bengal Vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar, AIR 1952 SC 75 was applicable only to a case where a special court was authorised to conduct the trial of an individual case, by a procedure substantially different from the normal procedure applicable to other person (for) similar offences. In the instant case the impugned Government Order does not single out the case of the Applicant to be tried at Agra but the said order fixes Agra as the place of trial of all parsons who may be found, within the district of Mathura, infringing any of the provisions of the UP Passenger Tax Act.

4. It appears that the attention of the learned Sessions Judge was not drawn to a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Ibadat Husain v. State of UP 1956 AWR 300, wherein similar question arose as in the instant case. In that case by a notification dated 23-2-1953 issued u/s 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Governor conferred upon the Regional Transport Magistrate, Allahabad, the power to try at Allahabad, all cases under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, arising within the districts of Allahabad, Mirzapur, Pratapgarh, Sultanpur and Faizabad. Proceedings were taken against Ibadat Husain for contravening the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act in the court of the Regional Transport Magistrate, at Allahabad. The power of the Governor directing by notification the special magistrate to