The State government cannot legislate on vehicle age limits for public transport, which is the exclusive domain of the Central government under the Motor Vehicles Act.

1. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. The Petitioners are engaged in the business of transport especially passenger vehicle. They are primarily said to be owners of light transport vehicles. The vehicles are used for transport of passengers on short or medium hauls. They have got aggrieved by issuance of amendment Notification No. 620 / rd] / ifj - / 2011, dated 18.05.2011 by virtue of which R.70 - A has been added to the original Chhattisgarh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994 (henceforth 'the Rules, 1994'), which is Annexure P / 1. Also under challenge is the Notification No. F5-07 / vkBandifj - / 2016, dated 08.02.2017 which has again amended certain provisions of R.70 - A. This Notification is Annexure P / 2.

3. By virtue of these amendments brought in by the State of Chhattisgarh, they have fixed life of vehicle which can be plied on the roads as Stage Carriage Vehicles between various stations.

4. From the original Notification dated 18.05.2011, the reason for issuance of R.70 - A is said to be object of providing safety and convenience of travelling passengers on the classified routes. The routes were divided into three categories; (A) short route which covers distance upto 65 KMs one way; (B) medium route which covers distance over 65 KMs but not exceeding 165 KMs one way; and (C) long route which covers distance of more than 165 KMs one way.

5. This amended Rule notified by the State of Chhattisgarh is supposed to be under purported exercise of power under S.65, S.96 and S.211 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act'). By virtue of three classifications as to the distance, age of the vehicle has also been laid down wherein the Rule states that no Stage Carriage Permit shall be granted or renewed on long routes if the vehicle is more than 8 years old from the date of initial registration etc. In case of medium route, 10 years old from the date of registration etc. and short route where the age of the vehicle should not be 12 years or more from the date of initial registration etc. The said age of the vehicles has now been made uniform to be 12 years for all classes of routes by yet another notification issued on 08.02.2017 which is Annexure P / 2.

6. Argument on behalf of the Petitioners made is that the power to fix shelf life of vehicle is vested in the Central Government under S.59 of the Act and this power cannot be usurped by the State Government by a via media and camouflage that power is being exercised with the object of fitness of the vehicles and their suitability of plying on short, medium and long routes keeping in mind the safety, comfort and convenience of passengers. The object of issuing the notification is a backdoor method of cutting down period of registration of a vehicle which is valid at the time of registration which has now been fixed at 15 years by the Central Government. By reducing that period and fixing their fitness or suitability for grant of Stage Carriage permit is an exercise of legislative power which is not vested in the State Government.

7. The Court thereafter has been taken through S.65, S.96 and S.211 of the Act, rather extensively. S.65 of the Act deals with the power of the State Government to make rules. S.96 of the Act deals with the power of the State Government to make rules for the purpose of that Chapter and S.211 of the Act deals with the power to levy fee.

8. At the very outset, the Court is of the opinion that none of the Sections which has been quoted in the Notification under challenge, gives power to the State to fix the life of the vehicle which is to be used for passenger transportatio