LAWS(KAR)-2012-9-84

NEELAKANTESHWARA MOTOR SERVICE Vs. KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT

Decided On September 22, 2012
Neelakanteshwara Motor Service Appellant
V/S
Karnataka State Transport Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal assails the concurrent conclusions arrived at by the writ Court as well as the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal ['KSTAT' for brevity] to the effect that the Karnataka State Transport Authority ['KSTA' for brevity] was not empowered or competent to vary the conditions of the existing permits by increasing their number of trips, post the nationalization of the concerned routes. By its decision dated 13.04.1987 the KSTA had permitted an increase by two additional trips in the existing inter state agreement of the petitioner pertaining to Bellary Scheme; and a direction to Secretary of the KSTA, Bangalore to assign suitable timings for all the four trips had been also issued. Reliance appears to have been placed on the Judgment in B.A. Jayaram Vs. Karnataka State Road Transportation Corporation, 1984 AIR(SC) 790, as well as the Constitution Bench decision in Adarsh Travels Bus Service Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1986 AIR(SC) 319 which had the effect of the overruling the earlier decision of the smaller benches.

(2.) A Stage Carriage Permit was granted to the Appellant on the interstate route between B.T. Project to Bellary via Rayadurga, Kanakal, authorizing him to operate two trips which are equivalent to one round trip. The Bellary Scheme, nationalizing this route, was published on 18.04.1964. An inter State agreement was entered into between the States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh on 01.09.1975. On 06.11.1978 the Appellant sought for doubling the number of trips from 2 to 4 (being equivalent to two round trips). On 10.01.1980 Bellary Scheme specifically saved the grants that were in operation on that date. It appears that this Scheme was modified by the Notification which appeared in the Karnataka Gazette dated 07.05.1984and is to the following effect:

(3.) The provisions of law which are relevant for consideration are Section 57 (8) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (which is in pari materia of Section 80 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988); and Section 68 (FF) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (which is in pari materia of Section 104 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988). The above provisions of the 1939 Act are reproduced below for facility of reference: