GAHC010280532025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/6117/2025

METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION GUWAHATI

M.T.A.G

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

SRI DEVRAJ DAS

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

SON OF LATE JYOTIRINDA KUMAR DAS

RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO 54

BYE LANE NO.1

AJANTA PATH

SURVEY

BELTOLA

IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP

ASSAM

PIN-781028.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY

TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT

DISPUR

GUWAHATI

ASSAM

PIN-781006.

2:THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER AND SCRETARY

KAMRUP METRO

BETKUCHI GUWAHATI

ASSAM PIN-40.

3:DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER AND SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KAMRUP METRO BETKUCHI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-40.

4:CHAIRMAN RTA AND DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METRO BLOCK -A

4TH FLOOR JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

------------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.K. Mahanta, Sr. Advocate Ms. N. Begum, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Nath, Sr. Govt. Advocate Ms. M. D. Borah, Standing Counsel BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

ORDER

17.12.2025 Date :

Heard Mr. K.K. Mahanta, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. N. Begum, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. D. Nath, the learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam appearing on behalf of the State and Ms. M.D. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Transport Department.

2. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the Resolution No. 2 of the RTA meeting dated 05.04.2025.

3. This Court passed a detailed order on 03.11.2025 thereby directing the Respondent Authorities to bring on record their stand by filing the affidavit. Further to that, this Court opined that the question, as to whether, there is a necessity of passing any interim order shall be considered on the next date. However, on the next date, time was sought for by the petitioner and accordingly, this Court fixed the matter on 15.12.2025. It is also seen that on 15.12.2025, when the matter was taken up, 1(one) week’s time was again sought for by the petitioner to file a reply. In pursuance thereto, a reply was filed on 16.12.2025 by the petitioner. However, on account of the order dated 16.12.2025 in WP(C) No. 7263/2025, the instant writ petition is listed today along with WP(C) No. 7263/2025.

4. The issue involved in the instant proceedings is with regard to the decision of the Regional Transport Authority not to permit the diesel buses in Route No. 23 (Khanapara to Dharapur via Ganeshguri Flyover) and Route No. 36 (Basistha Mandir to Dharapur Via Paltanbazar), wherein 167 members of the petitioner’s association are plying their buses.

5. Mr. K.K. Mahanta, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the actions taken by the Respondent Authorities is not permissible without complying with the mandate of Chapter VI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, “the Act of 1988”). It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that the very decision which has been taken to oust the 167 members of the petitioner’s association is to accommodate the buses run by the Assam State Transport Corporation which is a State Transport Undertaking. He therefore submitted that without following the mandate, more particularly, Section 99 of the Act of 1988 by floating a scheme, asking for objections and thereupon taking a decision, the Respondent Authorities have no authority or jurisdiction to do so.

6. In addition to that, the learned Senior Counsel also referred to Section 67 of the Act of 1988 whereby only the State Government have been empowered to control road transport, including the power to make schemes for transportation of goods and passengers and to issue licenses under such schemes for promotion, development and efficiency in transportation in respect to protection and enhancement of the environment. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that such power, which is