M P EASO Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER ALLEPPEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Validity of R.302A of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the 1961 Rules, is the question that arises for consideration in these Original Petitions. When the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, hereinafter referred to as 'the 1989 Rules', came into force petitioners amended the Original Petitions including a prayer to quash R.270 of the 1989 Rules.

(2.) Petitioners in O.P.Nos. 3961/86, 5624/86, 6509/86,8798/86 and 103/87 are owners of Heavy contract carriages. The other Original Petitions are filed by owners of Hindustan Diesel Trukkers who are plying their vehicles as contract carriages. All vehicles involved in these proceedings were registered prior to 3-3-1986 on which day R.302A of the 1961 Rules was introduced. When the petitioners approached the Transport Authorities either for getting renewal of the permits or for getting fitness certificates to the vehicles, they were directed to increase the number of seats in the vehicles by virtue of R.302A of the 1961 Rules. Petitioners challenge the action of the respondents in insisting them to increase the seating capacity of the vehicles. According to them, the vehicles which were registered prior to 3-3-1986 do not come within the mischief of that Rule. Provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act do not authorise the transport authorities to compel the owners of the vehicles to vary the seating capacity noted in the Registration Certificate of the vehicles. It is their further contention that the action on the part of the respondents amounts to interference with their fundamental right to carry on the business under Art.19(1) (g) of the Constitution. Petitioners further contend that R.302A of the 1961 Rules gives unbridled power to the registering authorities to fix the number of seats in the contract carriages and consequently it violates the principles contained in Art. 14 of the Constitution as well.

(3.) On behalf of the State detailed counter affidavits have been filed. Main contentions raised therein are to the following effect. The 1961 Rules as it stood did not contain provisions authorising the State and its officers to insist on the number of seats to be fitted in contract carriages so as to accommodate the maximum passengers in proportion to the availability of floor space. Operators of contract carriages show a tendency for reducing the number of seats under the guise of passengers' convenience. This was resorted to for evading tax which is linked with the number of seats in the vehicles. In order to get over this manipulation attempted to by the owners of contract carriages Government thought it fit to introduce R.302A in the 1961 Rules. Provisions contained in that Rule are not violative of Art.14 of the Constitution. Nor do they interfere with the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Art.19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The fixation of number of seats according to floor space is reasonable and is in the interest of the public since it provides more accommodation and enables the State to realise more revenue. Since no guideline can be set up fixing the number of seats, it was provided that the seats are to be fixed proportionate to the floor space available for providing comfortable seats. Even though that rule cannot be given retrospective effect, and cannot affect the registration already granted to the vehicles, the rule can be enforced by the Regional Transport Authorities while issuing or renewing the temporary permits after taking into consideration all aspects like fitness of the vehicles etc. The Rule was introduced to put an end to the practice of evading vehicle tax by reducing the number of seats.