RATANLAL AGRWAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Appeals Nos. 1022 to 1037 of 1965 are appeals under certificate granted by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and arise from orders made by that Court in applications under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(2.) The Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) incorporated under the Road Transport Corporations Act, is the appellant in all the appeals. For the purpose of effectuating the nationalisation of Road Transport Services on certain routes in the State of Madhya Pradesh, the appellant framed five schemes, being Schemes Nos. 2, 4, 5, 7 and 9, which were duly published in the State Gazette. THE existing operators who were affected by the proposed schemes filed objections. THE objections were heard by Shri R. S. Shukla, Special Secretary to the State Government in the Home Department, and he passed in each case an order approving the scheme after modifying the same, in certain respects. Scheme No. 5, as approved, was published in the State Gazette on October 18, 1963 and the other four schemes, as duly approved, were published in the State Gazette dated February 7, 1964. Orders were then issued cancelling and modifying certain existing permits and the holders of those permits were required to produce them for cancellation or for making necessary amendments. THEreupon, several objectors filed writ petitions in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging the order of the Special Secretary on various grounds. Writ petitions were filed against each of the schemes separately, but the grounds raised were common and the reliefs claimed were identical. In substance, the operators challenged the various steps taken under the provisions contained in Chapter IV-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Act IV of 1939), hereinafter called the Act, and the rules framed thereunder.

(3.) As a result of the conclusion reached by them, the learned Judges quashed the order of the Special Secretary dated February 2, 1965, the publication of the Schemes Nos. 2, 4, 5, 7 and 9 in the State Gazette and the subsequent action taken in pursuance thereof under section 68-F. They remitted the cases to the Special Secretary for a fresh decision in accordance with law with "advertence" to the observations they had made in their order (1). Against the said orders of the High Court the Corporation applied for and obtained certificate of fitness and filed the present appeals.