SERVICEMEN TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION REGD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India have been filed on behalf of 97 ex-servicemen. The petitioners were self-employed with the help of Director-General Resettlement (DGR) , Ministry of Defence, government of India, in the business of motor transport. They were given the facility of concessional demand loans by the respondent-banks for the purchase of buses. The Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) offered them routes to operate their buses. On their failure to repay the loan instalments the banks have instituted recovery suits against them in the civil courts. The petitioners have sought a direction in these petitions to the respondent banks to settle the loan recoveries on payment of nominal interest and further that the DTC should refund the amount of royalty, fine-amount and the security charged from them. It is further prayed that the petitioners be compensated because the losses incurred by the petitioners in the motor transport business were due to the negligence on the part of the DGR and DTC.

(2.) The DGR is a department functioning under the Ministry of Defence, government of India and is responsible for resettlement of exservicemen through employment in government service, public/private a sector and self employment through industries, transportation, small-scale business, etc. In the year 1974 the DGR approached the DTC to reserve some routes in the Union Territory of Delhi for the ex-servicemen. The DTC having agreed, the proposal was advertised through the newspapers and the ex-servicemen were asked to submit their applications. From amongst the applicants the petitioners were selected for the allotment of routes. The DGR assisted the petitioners in getting concessional-loans for the purchase of buses and further helped them in getting chassis on priority basis. The DTC allotted routes to the petitioners within the Union Territory of Delhi and hired their buses for plying on the said routes. Each of the petitioners entered into an agreement with the DTC which contained the terms and conditions of hiring the buses.

(3.) According to the petitioners the DGR and DTC jointly prepared a project called "transport Resettlement Project" with the twin objects. It was sought to rehabilitate the petitioners and to enlist a cadre of exservicemen transport operators to help the DTC to run the public transport system in Delhi in a disciplined and efficient manner. The petitioners state that they were lured in the project and were made to sign a contract with the DTC on the understanding that they would earn substantial income. It is further stated that thirty private limited companies were formed with the help of the chartered accountants appointed by the DGR. The petitioners had no option in the matter. Apart from the companies there were individuals who were also selected for the project. The petitioners complained that the routes allotted to them were such where no passengers were available and the traffic was almost nil. The routes were new and as such the transport facilities were inadequate resulting in greater wear and tear. According to the petitioners the project failed within one month of its start in March 1975 and they incurred heavy losses. Since there was no income from the project the petitioners could not pay the loan instalments and as a consequence the banks filed recovery suits against them. The petitioners further contend that the DTC deliberately changed the original administrative operational controlled charge basis of hiring the buses to a new scheme called kilometer scheme. According to the petitioners the kilometer scheme was detrimental to the interest of the petitioners and resulted in huge losses to them.