Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 27407
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
MR JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, J
EASY RIDE TRANSPORTS – Appellant
Versus
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUHTORITY – Respondent
C.R.P.(NPD). No.3134 of 2023 and CMP.No.19451 of 2023
Mr.M.Palani for Mr.D.Kumaralingam, Mr.R.Ramanlal, Additional Advocate General-IV assisted by Ms.Amritha Poongodi Dinakaran, Government Advocate, Mr.Muralivinodh, Mr.K.Hariharan
Special provisions under the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Act allow for variations beyond 24 kilometers, overriding general restrictions in the Motor Vehicles Act.
Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 80(3) - Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles (Special Provisions) Act, 1992 - Section 6(3) and Rule 4(4) - Application for variation of permit - The petitioner sought to extend the route of a mofussil service, which was restricted by the Regional Transport Authority to 24 kilometers. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal upheld this restriction, leading to a civil revision petition. The court found that the special provisions under the Tamil Nadu Act allow for variations beyond the 24-kilometer limit, provided applications are made annually. The court emphasized that special laws take precedence over general laws. (Paras 8, 12, 67)
(B) Special Law vs. General Law - The court reiterated that where a special law exists, it excludes the operation of general law, thus allowing the petitioner to seek variations under the special provisions without being restricted by the general provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. (Paras 64, 66)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a motor vehicle operator, sought to extend its route from Lakshmi Mills to Coimbatore Gandhipuram bus stand, which was initially restricted by the Regional Transport Authority. The application for variation was repeatedly delayed and ultimately rejected.
Findings of Court:
The court set aside the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the applicability of the special provisions under the Tamil Nadu Act, allowing for variations beyond the 24-kilometer limit.
Issues: The main issues included whether the application for variation could exceed the 24-kilometer limit and the interpretation of the special provisions under the Tamil Nadu Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the special provisions under the Tamil Nadu Act allow for variations beyond the 24-kilometer limit, emphasizing that special laws take precedence over general laws.
Result: The civil revision petition stands allowed.
ORDER
This civil revision petition arises against the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in MVA.No.21 of 2022 dated 03.05.2023 confirming the order of the Regional Transport Authority, Tiruppur (North Region) made in R.No.032874/A3/2019 dated 18.07.2020.
2. The civil revision petitioner is a motor vehicle operator. It is a partnership firm, initially operating a stage carriage as a town service. The service was between Tiruppur old bus stand and Karumathampatti. In 1996, taking advantage of T.N.Act 41 of 1992, the civil revision petitioner made an application seeking a variation of service by converting its town service into a mofussil service and for extension of route from Karumathampatti to Coimbatore. It also sought for additional single routes and for reduction of existing single routes. On 05.02.1996, the application was favorably considered. The service was converted into a mofussil service. However while dealing with the extension of the route from Karumathampatti to Coimbatore, the Regional Transport Authority restricted it only to Lakshmi Mills, i.e., the Authority only granted extension till Lakshmi Mills though the application sought extension till Coimbatore bus stand. This was on the ground that if the extension is granted to Coimbatore bus stand, the route would come to 27 kilometers and since there is a restriction of 24 kilometers, while granting the extension, it was restricted to Lakshmi Mills as the distance between Karumathampatti and Lakshmi Mills was 24 kilometers.
3. Earlier, the State of Tamil Nadu enacted a legislation titled “The Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles (Special Provisions) (Cancellation of Variations of Conditions of Permit) Act 19 of 1996. By this legislation, all the variations granted between 24.01.1996 and 24.05.1998 were cancelled.
4. Since the petitioner's permit was granted on 05.02.1996, which is after the cut off date, the variation granted on 05.02.1996 stood cancelled. A batch of writ petitions were filed before this court challenging the constitutional validity of the Act 19 of 1996. The said legislation came to be struck down by a judgment of this court on 07.08.2003 in R. Srinivasan v. State of T.N. , (2003) 4 CTC 12. Consequent to the writ petition being allowed, the variation granted to the petitioner on 05.02.1996 stood restored. Thereby, the petitioner started operating its vehicle on the varied route from Tiruppur old bus stand to Coimbatore Lakshmi Mills.
5. Pleading that the Lakshmi mills, which is situated on the busy Avinashi road and since the police authorities also called upon the petitioner to park its vehicle elsewhere, the petitioner took out another application for variation. This application sought extension from termini being Lakshmi Mills to Coimbatore Gandhipuram bus stand, the extension being only for three kilometers. The petitioner filed an application before the Regional Transport Authority. This application was not considered by the authority stating that there had been no orders from the Government to entertain the applications for variation. This constrained the petitioner to file W.P.No.1315 of 2009 for a direction to consider the application and pass orders. This writ petition came to be ordered on 29.01.2009 directing the authority to consider the same.
6. The petitioner on the strength of the order of this court resubmitted the application seeking for variation. The authority, in obedience to the order of this court, notified the same and invited representations from the other operators. Having notified the application, no further steps were taken for a period of seven years. Therefore, the petitioner filed another writ petition in W.P.No.29629 of 2016 to direct the Regional Transport Authority to consider the application filed by him. This writ petition came to be ordered on 26.09.2016 directing the Regional Transport Authority, Tiruppur to consider the application in accordance with law. The time limit fixed for consideration of the applicatio
