VEERAMANI AND Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the resolution dated 11-8-1976 passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Bangalore, resolving that the quote of auto rickshaws raised from 6,000 to 6,500 should be utilised exclusively for granting permits to owner-cum-drivers, giving preference to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes applicants recommended by the Karnataka State Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation and to the applicants jointly sponsored by the Scheduled Banks and the State Government to finance the owner-cum-drivers.

(2.) The petitioners and the Intervening respondents have made separate applications for grant of permit for running auto rickshaws within the Bangalore Corporation limits and also within 25 kilometers from and around the Corporation limits. The applications filed by the petitioners and the intervening respondents were pending on the date when the impugned resolution was passed. In pursuance of the aforesaid resolution, the applications of the petitioners and the intervening respondents have been returned for re-submission whenever the vacancies arise.

(3.) The contentions of Sri H. B. DATAR, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, are (i) that 'autorickshaws' falls within the definition of motor cab which falls within the category of 'contract carriages' as defined In the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and. a motor cab is excluded from the purview of the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976, as such there was no bar whatsoever for granting permits to the petitioners and intervening respondents; (ii) that there was no provision contained in the Act on the date of pawing of the impugned resolution enabling the, R.T.A. to reserve the permits in question to certain class and category of persons as shown in the impugned resolution and that even the Amendment Act 47 of 1978 which provides for certain percentage of reservation of stage carriage and public carrier permits to certain clan and category of persons, does (not?) provide for reservation of permits relating to motor cabs falling within the category of contract carriages to the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and also to the other categories mentioned in the impugned resolution.