LAWS(KAR)-1990-3-33

BHAKTHAVATSALAM Vs. ASST REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER BANGALORE WEST

Decided On March 06, 1990
BHAKTHAVATSALAM Appellant
V/S
ASST.REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, BANGALORE WESTACT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rules 1989. The other reason that have been set forth in some of the orders do not realty matter much. Therefore, it is unnecessary to refer to those reasons.

(2.) It is submitted by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner that Rule 151(2) does not apply to motor vehicles or the restriction placed therein in Rule 151 (2) is not applicable to Goods Carriages and Motor Cabs and therefore the reason upon which the petitioner's claim is rejected is wholly irrelevant. However, the learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance upon the expression 'maxicab' under Section 2(22) and submitted if falls into the description of a public service vehicle and therefore is covered by Rule 151 (2) and submitted that the action taken by the respondents is correct.

(3.) In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, it is necessary to refer to a few provisions of the Act. Section 2 (22) of the Act defines a 'maxicab', which means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than six passengers, but not more than twelve passengers, excluding the driver, for hire or reward. Similarly a 'motorcab' is described. But such vehicle is limited to carry not more than six passengers. A public service vehicle is defined under Section 2 (35) as meaning any motor vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward, and includes a maxicab, a motorcab, contract carriage, and stage carriage. Rule 151 (2) reads as follows: "The minimum seating capacity of a'vehicle shall be directly proportionate to the wheel base of the vehicle. In public service vehicles other than goods carriages and motor cabs the minimum number of seats including two seats for driver and conductor or attender to be provided shall be as specified in column (2) of the table below : TABLE <FRM>JUDGEMENT_363_KANTLJ1_1990Html1.htm</FRM> Therefore the question that arises for consideration now is whatever may be the description given by the petitioner, it is to be noticed that whether it 'falls within the description of a public service vehicle other than a goods carriage or a motor cab.