U. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. State

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1977 Supreme(Online)(All) 6

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
H. N. Seth, J
U. P. State Road Transport Corporation v. State

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents: S. K. Dhaon

Table of Content
1. facts of private operators holding permits. (Para 2 , 3)
2. exclusivity of the notified route under law. (Para 4 , 5)
3. judicial interpretation of operator rights. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. the court's stance on non-renewability of permits. (Para 9 , 10)
5. final ruling against permit renewals for prohibited routes. (Para 13 , 14)

1. A learned single Judge of this Court has referred the following question to this Bench:
"Whether under a scheme in which a notified route overlaps a portion of a pre - existing route there is total exclusion of private operators without there being specific provision cancelling or modifying the existing permits on the overlapped route, can the permits be so renewed as to cover overlapped portion of the notified route?"

2. The facts giving rise to this reference are necessary to be noted. Respondents Nos. 3 to 14 are private operators, they held stage carriage permits for providing road transport service on the route Muzaffarnagar - Saharanpur via Bamanheri - Deoband and Galgalheri. On the expiry of the period of their permits they made applications for renewal of their permits but the Regional Transport Authority rejected their application on th