STATE OF KERALA Vs. SEBASTIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by S.67 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, hereinafter referred to as "the 1988 Act", issued G.O.(P) No. 19/94/PW & T dated March 28, 1994 as S.R.O. No. 364/94. By the said notification, Government modified the earlier notifications relating to the same subject. As per the present notification, S.R.O. 364/94, rates of fares for different classes of stage carriage services were fixed. Fare for ordinary Mofussil services, including City, Town and Limited Stop City services, is fixed at 18 paise per kilometre. In the case of Fast Passenger and Limited Stop Fast Passenger, the fare is fixed at 22 paise. In the case of Super Fast services, Express services, Super Express services, Deluxe services and Super Express services, the rates of fares is 24 paise, 27 paise, 28 paise, 30 paise and 32 paise respectively. As per the notification, permit holders of stage carriages were directed to provide certain additional facilities to the passengers. Clause (F) of the notification deals with those additional facilities to be provided by operators having permits for plying Fast Passenger, Limited Stop Fast Passenger, Super Fast service, Express service, Super Express service, Deluxe Service and Super Deluxe Service. For a proper understanding of the same, we read the said clause:

(2.) Learned Single Judge quashed the notification primarily on four grounds. A notification issued under S.67 of the 1988 Act can only be treated as an administrative direction and not legislative in character. So, it cannot in any manner interfere with the jurisdiction of the quasi judicial authority of the Regional Transport Authorities and State Transport Authority. Secondly it was held that the impugned notification violates provisions contained in the Panchayat Act relating to the establishment of bus stations. The third ground relied on by the learned Judge is that the notification imposed unreasonable restrictions on the permit holders on their right to carry on the motor transport business. It was also the view of the learned Judge that under S.67 of the 1988 Act, the State Government can issue directions regarding the fixation of fares and freights only and not on any other matter.

(3.) The first question that has to be dealt with in these appeals is regarding the nature and effect of a notification issued by the Government in exercise of the powers under S.67 of the 1988 Act. S.67 inter alia authorises the State Government to issue directions by notification in the Official Gazette to the State Transport Authority and Regional Transport Authorities regarding the fixing of fares and freights of stage carriages, contract carriages and goods carriages. This power has to be exercised having regard to the advantages offered to the public, trade and industry by the development of motor transport, the desirability of co-ordinating road and rail transport, the desirability of preventing the deterioration of the road system and the desirability of preventing the uneconomic competition among holders of permits. This means that any notification issued under S.67 must have regard to the advantages offered to the public. In otherwords, while fixing fares and freights for stage carriages, contract carriages and goods carriages, the Government must have regard to the advantages offered to the public. Putting it differently, any notification regarding the fixing of fares and freights of stage carriages, contract carriages and goods carriages, provision can also be made for extending additional comforts and benefits to the public. It, therefore, follows that while fixing fares for stage carriages of different types, Government can certainly insist on the permit holders to offer more amenities and comforts to the travailing public.