SADANANDSHENOY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for decision in these cases being identical they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. It is sufficient to refer to the facts of one of these cases as those are typical of other cases too. We propose to refer to the facts in O. P. No. 3943 of 1972 since an independent counter affidavit has been filed in that case. The State has prayed that the said counter affidavit may be adopted in other cases.

(2.) S.68(2)(ww) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) enables Rules being made for the licensing of agents engaged in the business of collecting, forwarding and distributing of goods carried by public carriers. The rule prior to its amendment by Act 56 of 1969 was a little different and the rule enabled the "licensing of agents engaged in the business of collecting goods carried by public carriers". Apparently in exercise of such powers R.225 of the Motor Vehicles Rules was framed by the State Government and that rule reads:

(3.) S.66A is a provision in the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 providing for the issue of a licence to a person engaged in the business of agency for collecting, forwarding or distributing goods carried by public carriers. That section reads: