Smt. Afsar
Jahan Begum Vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh & Ors
[1996] INSC 47 (11
January 1996)
Ramaswamy,
K.Ramaswamy, K.G.B. Pattanaik (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (1) 604 1996 SCALE (1)609
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
WITH WRIT
PETITION (C) NOS. 8430, 8330 & 9521-29, 2497-2500, 8274-8275, 7437-38 OF
1981 AND C.A. NO. 3191, 3192-93 OF 1981.
O R D
E R Substitution allowed in W.P. (C) No. 8330/81.
All
these writ petitions and appeal are disposed of by common judgment since common
question of law arises for decision in these cases.
Admittedly,
the routes on which the petitioners/appellants are seeking to intersect and ply
their vehicles are notified routes. The notified routes were published and
became final under Chapter IV-A of Act 4, 1939. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
introduced Chapter VI as a special provision relating to the State transport
undertakings. Section 99 authorises preparation and publication of the proposal
regarding road transport service of a State transport undertakings. Section 102
deals with cancellation or modification of the schemes. It provides that the
State Government may, at any time, if it consider necessary in the public
interest so to do, modify any approved scheme after giving :
(i) the
state transport undertaking; and
(ii) any
other person who in the opinion of the State Government is likely to be
affected by the proposed modification an opportunity of being heard in respect
of the proposed modification.
Under
sub-section (2), the State Government shall publish the modification proposed
under sub-section (1) in the State Gazette and in one of the newspapers in the
regional languages circulating in the area in which it is proposed to be
covered by such modification together with the date not being less than 30 days
from the publication in the official gazette, the time and place at which any
representation received in this behalf will be heard by the State Government.
While
the appells are pending, when it was brought to our notice that a proposal has
been made by the State Government for modification of the approved schemes, by
our order dated 1.11.1995, we have ordered that the learned counsel appearing
for the State should verify and place before the Court whether the draft
modification has been approved and published as requried under Section 102(2)
of the Act and also to file an affidavit by a competent and responsible officer
of the necessity to introduce the modification of the approved schemes and the
action taken thereon. Pursuant thereto, the additional affidavit has been filed
by K.K. Tiwari, R.T.O., Indore who has stated that the Government by
notification dated 21.2.1991 relaxed only to distance of 25 kms. on the nationalised
route to private operators under certain conditions and restrictions. The
appellants are not entitled to the benefit of those corridor sheltes now given
under the modified scheme and relaxation granted under Section 102(2) of the
Act. The petitioners, therefore, cannot claim and benefit of relaxation. The
have stated in the notification thus :
"And,
Whereas, the State Government in view of additional demand of transport
services considers necessary in the public interest to allow private operators
to ply on hire or reward stage carriages on routes covered by the said Schemes
and for that purpose desires to modify all the said Schemes in the manner as
shown in the Schedules below:
SCHEDULE
In
each of the said schemes, the following words figures and brackets shall be
added at the end, namely :
"Notwithstandign
anything contained in this Scheme, the private operators may be permitted to
ply Stage-Carriages for hire or reward subject to the following conditions,
namely :- (1) Limit of exemption on notified route shall not exceed 25
kilometers.
(2)
The Private operators shall ply the stage carriages over the distance, other
than the distance of the notified routes which shall not be less than twice,
the distance of the notified route covered by the permit ;
(3)
Calculations of limit of exemption of 25 kilometers on notified route shall be
made on the basis of total;
(4)
This exemption shall be application to notified routes under all Scheme, even
though the Schemes might have been implemented after 1979;
(5)
The Private Operators shall not pick-up or set down passengers on the notified
route." In Adarsh Travels Bus Service vs. State of U.P. & Ors. [(1985)
4 SCC 557] a Constitution Bench of this Court considered Section 68-C, 68-D(3)
and 68-FF read with Section 2(28-A of the Act 4, 1939 and had held that :
"Once
a scheme is published under Section 68-D in relation to any area or route or
portion thereof, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial of other persons
or otherwise, no person other than the State Transport Undertaking may operate
on the notified area or notified route except as provided in the scheme itself.
A necessary consequence of these provisiosn is that no rpivate operate can
operate his vehicle on any part or portion or a notified are or notified route
unless authorised so to do by the terms of the scheme itself. He may not
operate on any part or portion of the notified route or area or the mere ground
that the permit as originally granted to him covered the notified route or
area" In this view of the matter, the only relaxation from the frozen
notified route or area from the scheme is as provided in the scheme itself. If
any operator on any route intersecting the notified route, has of necessity, to
ply the vehicle strictly in conformity with the restrictiv corridor shelter and
no more. The relaxation is not meant to sabotage the approved scheme but to subserve
public interest.
Shri Gambhir,
learned counsel contended that in view of the relaxation upto a distance of 25 kms.
been provided in the Scheme as modified and notified under Section 102(2) of
the Act, all the petitioners are entitled to ply in the terms thereof. We
cannot give any direction or relief to the petitioners in these writ petitions.
It is seen that the Government having approved the routes, have exercised the
power under Section 102(2) of the At and given benefit by intersecting the
approved routes only upto a distance of 25 kms. without picking up or setting
down the passengers on the modified route, strictly subject to the terms and
conditions mentioned therein. Under the terms and conditions mentioned therein,
Under those circumstances, the petitioners cannot be given any relief. But if
they have any right under the modified scheme, then that would be a matter
appropriately to be gone into by the RTA or STA, as the case may be, after due
notice to the State Transport Undertaking and all other interested persons.
The
writ petitions are accordingly dismissed.
Consequently,
the appeal is also dismissed. No costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2