M K VENKATACHALAM Vs. S T A T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Art. 226 (1) (b) and (c) of the Constitution of lndias the petitioner has challenged, the validity of the, order passed by the State Transport Authority, Bangalore, dated 3-5-1976 in subject No. 1/76-77 and that of the, Karnataka State, Trnansport Appellate Tribunal dated, 7-2-1978, passed in Appeal No 461 of 1976.

(2.) The petitioner filed an application for grant of a National Permit in pursuance of the Notification issued by the State Transport Authority under S. 57 of the, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The application of the petitioner came to be rejected by the State Transport Authority on the ground that the petitioner was the holder of an Inter-State permit and he sold the same and that the said sale was made for profit and as such, the petytioner was not entitled for the grant of national permit. Accordingly, the State Transport Authority rejected the application. In the appeal also the Karnataka, State Transport Appellate Tribunal has adopted the same reasoning and has rejected, the appeal.

(3.) It was submitted by Sri Gupta, the learned Counsel appealing for the petitioner that the inter-state permit that was transferred, by the petitioner was due to the fact that the vehicle had become very old and he was not entitled to replace the vehicle; there fore, with the permission of the 2nd respondent, the permit was transferred by the petitioner. Hence it was submitted that when the permit was transferred with the permission of the State Transport Authority, the respondents could not have refused to grant the national permit on the aforesaid ground. It was also submitted by the learned counsel that there was no material before the respondents to come to the conclusion that the transfer of the inter-state permit by the petitioner was for the purpose of making profit. He also submitted that in the matter of transfer of earlier permit, there) was no clandestine transaction whatsoever and at any rate thepre was no material before the respondents to justify such an inference. It was further submitted by the learned Counsel that both the authorities below have failed to look into the provisions of sub-section (11) and (12) of Section 63 of the Act, which came to be introduced, by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1966 which came into force on 28th September 1975. The relevant portions of sub-section (11) and (12) of Section 63 of the Act, as introduced by the amendment, read as; follows: -