STATE OF HARYANA Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State Haryana as sucessor to the State of Punjab is the petitioner in this writ petition which the Delhi Administration is the first respondent.

(2.) The petition avers that in 1950 an agreement was entered into between the Government of Punjab and Delhi to run public service vehicles between the two State on joint routes of which one of the terminal stands would be in Delhi and the other terminal stand in some town in Punjab. According to this agreement, the permits issued by one State were to be countersigned by the other State there by providing facilities in matters of transport to the public in the territories of both the State and this agreement became operative from January 1951. It is further averred that another agreement was concluded between the two State on 25-71956 whereby it was agreed between them that the State of Punjab would have the right to extend its services on inter-State routes, agreed upon between the parties, to any town in the State of Punjab and this agreement has remained in force ever since and it was respected and recoginsed by both the parties. Pursuant to these agreements, buses have been plying between Delhi and places in Punjab on the basis of inter-State permits issued by the Transport Authority of one State and countersigned by the Transport Authority of the other State and the services operating on such routes have been extended to other towns in Punjab by means of different and independent permits granted by the transport authority of Punjab fir the routes between the terminals of the inter-State permits and such other towns, in Punjab. One such route is Karnal-Delhi operated by the Punjab Roadways (now Haryana Roadways) and the extended service is between Karnal and Chandigarh covered by an independent permit granted by the transport authority of Punjab. In the case of Punjab Roadways (now Harayana Roadways), every permit granted for its operation was for a service of Stage Carriage and the whole fleet of a unit is entered on that permit and the permit is not for an individual vehicle. Thus, on the permit issued for the inter-State route of Karnal- Delhi, the whole fleet of buses of Chandigarh depot of the Punjab Roadways (now Harayana Roadways) is entitled and similarly on the permit issued by the transport authority of Punjab for the route Karnal-Chandigarh, the whole fleet of buses of the Punjab Roadways (now Harayana Roadways) of the Chandigarh depot was entered so that anyone of the said fleet can run between Karnal and Delhi, and Karnal and Chandigarh, and, therefore, the same bus which runs between Delhi and Karnal can continue to run from Karnal and Chandigarh. Pursuant to these two permits, viz., the inter-State permit from Karnal to Delhi and the Punjab permit from Karnal to Chandigarh and in view of the facilities afforded by the whole fleet of the Chandigarh depot of the Punjab Roadways (now Harayana Roadways) being entered on each of the said two permits. The Punjab Roadways (now Harayana Roadways) started operating the same bus from Delhi to Karnal and from Karnal to Chandigarh by issuing through tickets at Delhi, to enable passengers to travel from Delhi to Chandigarh direct. The further allegation contained in the petition is that feeling offended on the non-acceptance of certain demands of Delhi Administration by the State of Punjab and instigated by the private operator of buses in the Union Territory of Delhi, the Delhi Transport authorities resolved to go back on the terms of the agreement arrived at between the two States of Punjab and Delhi on 25-7-1956 and approached the Inter-State Transport Commission, New Delhi, for interference.

(3.) The Inter-State Transport Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) on 27-8-1966 gave its 'advice' under Section 63A(2)(b) and according to that 'advice':