SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANGANATH MISRA, CJI., M.H. KANIA, KULDIP SINGH, JJ.
Mithilesh Garg, etc. etc., Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, others etc. etc., Respondents
Writ Petn. (Civil) No. 1345 of 1989 (With W.P. (Civil) Nos. 1110 of 1989, 869 of 1990, 194 of 1991, etc. etc.), D/-22-11-1991.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 42 to 68- Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 14 and 19 - Challenged in these bunch – Accident – Claim of Compensation - Petitions notice statutory provisions operating in field of motor transport business prior to and after the coming into force - representations made by persons already providing passenger transport facilities by any means along or near the proposed route or area or by any association representing persons interested in the provision of road transport facilities recognized in this behalf by the State Government, or by any local authority or police authority within whose jurisdiction any part of proposed route or area lies - Held, Petitioners have further contended that the conditions of roads, social status of applicants possibility of small operators being eliminated by big operators conditions of hilly routes fuel availability and pollution control are some of the important factors which Regional Transport Authority roily is bound to take into consideration while taking a decision on an application for grant of permit - These are the matters which are supposed to be within the comprehension of the transport authorities. The legislative policy under the Act cannot be challenged on these grounds - It is not disputed that the Regional Transport Authority has the power under Act to refuse an application for grant of permit by giving reasons - It is for the authority to take into consideration all relevant factors at the time of quasi-judicial consideration of the applications for grant of permits - Petitions dismissed.
JUDGMENT
KULDIP SINGH, J.:- The liberalization for private sector operations in the Road Transport field - under Section 80 and other provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been challenged in these bunch-petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution, filed by the existing-operators, primarily on the ground that they have been adversely affected in the exercise of their rights under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India.
2. It is necessary to notice the statutory provisions operating in the field of motor transport business prior to and after the coming into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called the Act). The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the old Act) was enacted and enforced with the object of having closer control to establish a coordinated system of transport. The subject of Mechanically Propelled Vehicles being in List III of the VIIth Schedule to the Constitution, various amendments were made from time to time by several State Legislatures either adding to or modifying the provisions of the old Act. Chapter IV of the old Act consisted of Sections 42 to 68 providing control of transport vehicles". Sections 47 and 57, to the relevant-extent, are re-produced as under:-
"47. Procedure of Regional Transport Authority in considering application for stage carriage permit- (1) A Regional Transport Authority shall, in considering an application for a stage carriage permit, have regard to the following matters, namely:-
(a) the interest of the public generally;
(b) the advantage to the public of the service to be provided, including the saving of time likely to be effected thereby and any ,convenience arising from journeys not being broken;
(c) the adequacy of other passenger transport services operating or likely to operate in the near future, whether by road or other means, between the places to be served;
(d) the benefit to any particular locality or localities likely to be afforded by the service;
(e) the operation by the applicant of other transport services, including those in respect of which applications from him for permits are pending;
(f) the condition of the roads included in the proposed route or area.
and shall also take into consideration any representations made by persons already providing passenger transport facilities by any means along or near the proposed route or area, or by any association representing persons interested in the provision of road transport facilities recognised in this behalf by the State Government, or by any local authority or police authority within whose jurisdiction any part of the proposed route or area lies;............
(3) A Regional Transport Authority may, having regard to the matters mentioned in sub-section (1), limit the number of stage carriages generally or of any specified type for which stage carriage permits may be granted in the region or in any specified area or on any specified route within the region.
57. Procedure in applying for and granting permits.- (1) An application for a contract carriage permit or a private carriers permit may be made at any time.
(2) An application for a stage carriage permit or a public carriers permit shall be made not less than six weeks before the date on which it is desired that the permit shall take effect, or, if the Regional Transport Authority appoints dates for the receipt of such applications, on such dates.
(3) On receipt of an application for a stage carriage permit or a public carriers permit, the Regional Transport Authority shall make the application available for inspection at the office of the Authority and shall publish the application or the substance thereof in the, prescribed manner together with a notice of the date before which representation in connection therewith may be submitted and the date, not being less than thirty days from such publication, on which, and the time and place at which, the application and any representation received will be considered:
Provided that, if the gra
relied on : Jasbhai Motibhai Desai v. Roshan Kumar
Hans Raj Kehar v. State of U.P.
NagarRiceand Flour Mills.N.T. Gowda
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.