G V SATHEESHA REDDY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are all persons who claim to be operating service as stage carriages pursuant to inter-State permits issued to them either by the transport authorities in the State of Karnataka or State of Andhra Pradesh as the routes on which the petitioners are operating through their vehicles, are inter state routes, having their origin in one State and terminus in the other State.

(2.) PETITIONERS have approached this Court seeking for relief being aggrieved by an inter-State agreement dated 7.3.2008 published in the Karnataka Gazette of the even date and marked as Annexure-B to the writ petition. An agreement that has been finalised between the States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh in terms of provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (for short 'the Act') complaining that an agreement of this nature has not necessarily gone through the requisite procedure envisaged by the statute particularly, the provisions of subsection (4) of Section 88 of the Act which is a prerequisite stage that has to be gone through for publishing the draft of the proposed agreement for the awareness and response of the general public, travelling public, and even of persons operating stage carriages on the routes and when such is the position, the draft copy should have been finalised after taking into consideration such representations made by inter-State persons; that in the present case though the State Government claims that it had published a draft agreement in terms of notifications/publication dated 3.10.2007 Annexure-A (in W.P.No.4905/2008), there is total variation with the proposals that had been published in the draft agreement and the final agreement in terms of Annexure-B, particularly, in respect of the some of the routes covered by this agreement and it is so indicated in respect of the routes covered by SI. Nos.6, 43, 68 and 69; that in respect of routes covered by these serial numbers, while the proposal was one of including the route from Chintamani Town in Karnataka to B. Kothakota in Andhra Pradesh, the final agreement, on the other hand, is a deviation in respect of the routes mentioned in the final agreement, which seeks to cover under the agreement a new route, rather an extended elongated route of the proposed route viz., Chintamani to Kadri including the extension from B. Kothakota to Kadri, which was not in the proposed agreement and likewise in the return journey, the route is sought to be extended up to Bangalore, whereas, earlier it was not operating from Chintamani to Bangalore; that the elongation of the route in both states viz., B. Kothakota to Kadri and from Chintamani to Bangalore is at variance from the proposal and to this extent, the agreement and copy produced at Annexure-B is not sustainable, for the simple reason that such final proposal having not gone through the requirement of a draft agreement being published and inviting representations from the general public and other concerned persons.

(3.) NOTICES had been issued to the respondents State of Karnataka, State of Andhra Pradesh and the proposed inter-State operators whose routes are sought to be covered in the final agreement and where a material modification is shown in the final agreement at variance with the draft agreement.