R RANGANATHA REDDY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a transport operator from Kerala State with contract carriage permit granted under Sec.74 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 144(b) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. THE permit is valid from 11.7. 1991 to 10. 7. 19%. Under the permit, the petitioner is entitled to operate the vehicle in the State of Kerala, Karnataka and Maharashtra from Tellich-erry to Bombay (via) Kannoor, Poyyanur, Kasar-gode, Mangalore, Udupi, Kunhapur, Ankola, Archilghat, Hubli, Dharward, Padayam, Nipani, Kolhapur, Sathura, Pune and Bombay. It was made conditional subject to counter-signature by the State Transport Authorities of Karnataka and Maharashtra on tax payment basis and also that the vehicle shall commence operation only after the permit is duly counter-signed by the State Transport Authorities. THE petitioner obtained a special permit under Sec.88(8) of the Act on 30. 8. 1991 valid from 1.9. 1991 to 7. 9. 1991. Under the said permit, the petitioner was permitted to visit the following places along with the party consisting of 48 persons.

(2.) WHEN the petitioner was operating the vehicle under the Special permit, the vehicle was stopped by the Motor Vehicles Inspector, (N.T) T.R.P.T. Check Post, Gudalur, Nilgiris on 4. 9. 1991. The petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,400 by way of tax payable in the State of Tamil Nadu. The relevant part of the Check report reads thus:

(3.) IN answer to this, learned Government Advocate contents that the basic permit under Sec.74,of theActiswith reference to a particular prescribed route mentioned expressly in the permit and it is not open to the authority to issue a Special permit under Sec.88(8) of the Act to the petitioner. There is no substance in this contention. It is not open to the Government of Tamil Nadu to contend that the Kerala State authorities have no jurisdiction to issue a permit under Sec.88(8) of the Act. Sec.88(8) of the Act reads that notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-sec.(l), the Regional Transport Authority of any one region, or, the State Transport Authority, may, for the convenience of the Public, grant a Special permit in relation to a vehicle covered by a permit issued under Sec.72 or under Sec.74 or under Sub-sec.(9) of Sec.88 for carrying a passenger or passengers for hire or reward under a contract, express or implied for the use of the vehicle as a whole without stopping to pick up or set down along the line or route passengers not included in the contract, and in every case where such special permit is granted, the Regional Transport Authority shall assign to the vehicle, for display thereon, a distinguishing mark in the form and manner specified by the Central Government and such special permit shall be valid in any other region or State without the counter signature of the Regional Transport Authority of the other region of the State. IN the present case, the petitioner's basic permit is clearly one falling under Sec.74 of the Act. Just because a specific route is mentioned expressly in the permit, it does not cease to be one covered by Sec.74 of the Act. IN fact, Sec.74 of the Act enables the Regional Transport Authority of grant a contract carriage permit and attach to the permit any one or more of the conditions set out in Sub-sec. (2) of the Act. Clause (i) of Sub-sec. (2) reads that the vehicles shall be used only in a specified area or on specified routes. Thus under Sec.74(2)(i) of the Act. theauthorityisentitled to specify the route or the routes to be used by the permit-holder for plying the vehicle. That has been done in the present case by the authority who issued the basic permit to the petitioner. That does not make the permit any the less one under Sec.74 of the Act. It is clearly covered by Sec.74 of the Act. Hence, the permit-holder is entitled to apply under Sec.88(8) of the Act for special Permit. That has been done in the present case and such a permit has been obtained. The Government order passed by the Tamil Nadu Government on 29. 5. 1991 contains only three exceptions. The first exception is permit issued by a State, where there is no reciprocal exemption from payment of tax for Tamil Nadu Vehicles. The second exemption relates to permits which allow passengers to be picked up and set down in the State of Tamil Nadu. The third exception relates to the special permit under Sec.88(8) of the Act without basic permit under Secs.72, 74 or 88 (9) of the Act. The present case does not attract any of the three exceptions. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of G.O.Ms.No.894, dated 29. 5. 1991 and is not liable to pay the tax due in Tamil Nadu whenever the petitioner gets a special permit under Sec.88(8) of the Act in relation to the basic permit obtained by him already on 11.7. 1991.