S SATHIA CHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. S. Sathiachandran, practising advocate of this Court has filed this Public Interest Litigation, seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus for the following reliefs.

(2.) EVEN at the outset, the petitioner fairly admits that he is pressing only in respect of the reliefs prayed in "b and d". In view of the same, let us consider whether the petitioner has made out a case for issuance of writ of mandamus/any other direction in respect of those two reliefs.

(3.) WITH regard to the above claim, in the counter affidavit filed by the Assistant Manager (legal), he has stated that the respondents are not collecting any unfair fares not authorised under the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicle Rules and the fares collected are supported by the Government orders. Though those details are not available in the counter affidavit, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 has placed necessary Government orders and notifications issued therein. As per G.O.Ms.No.1204 Home (Transport VII) Department dated 05.12.2001, the Government have incorporated the revised fare structures and published the same in an Extraordinary issue of Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 05.12.2001. Before going into the notifications, it is relevant to note that Section 67(1)(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 empowers the State Government to fix fares and freights (including the maximum and minimum in respect thereof) to all categories of vehicle viz., Stage carriages, contract carriages and goods carriages. Though the petitioner has submitted that there is no specific provision, which enables the Government to collect different fares in respect of different type of vehicles, we are satisfied that the above referred provisions empowers the Government to classify various type of vehicles and fix different types of fairs for the same.