SUDHIR SHARMA Vs. S T A T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner holds a permanent stage carriage permit for plying his vehicle on Moradabad-Kashipur-Ramnagar route. He has challenged the order of the State Transport Authority, dated May 2, 1978, granting stage carriage permits to respondents Nos. 4 to 20 on the said route and also the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, dated April 16, 1979 dismissing the petitioner's revision and upholding the order of the State Transport Authority granting permits to the respondents.

(2.) The State Transport Undertaking of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification on 22-2-1968 proposing a scheme under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the exclusive operation of its vehicles on the routes (1) Moradabad-Kashipur-Ramnagar via Thakurdwara. (2) Moradabad-Dilari via Kashipur and Doraha, (3) Moradabad-Tanda-Darhyal-Kashipur and (4) Moradabad-Tanda Darhyal-Kashipur-Ramnagar. By another notification published under Section 68-C proposing a scheme for notifying the route Nagina-Kashipur via Afzalgarh-Jaspur for the exclusive operation of the vehicles of the State Transport Undertaking. These are interregional routes and as such the State Transport Authority had taken these routes under its control. The scheme proposed under the aforesaid notification have not been finalised as yet. In February and May, 1977 the State Transport Authority granted temporary permits to respondents Nos. 4 to 20 for plying their mini buses on the aforesaid routes under Section 68-F (1-C) of the Act as the State Road Transport Corporation had not made any application by that time for the grant of temporary permit to it. Subsequently, the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the Corporation, made application for grant for temporary permits on the said routes. The State Transport Authority, by its order dated 20-1-1978, granted temporary permits to the Corporation on the routes in respect of which notifications under Section 68-C had been issued. The Corporation, however, surrendered these permits on 26-2-1978 and made fresh applications before the State Transport Authority for the grant of temporary permits to it on the routes (1) Ramnagar-Delhi via Kashipur-Moradabad. Garh-Hapur, (2) Jaspur-Delhi via Kashipur-Moradabad (3) Ram-nagar-Meerut via Kashipur-Moradabad and (4) Jaspur-Meerut via Kashipur-Moradabad. On March 9, 1978, the State Transport Authority granted permits to the Corporation for the said routes. Thereafter respondents Nos. 4 to 20 were directed to stop plying their vehicles on the routes in respect of which temporary permits had been issued to them. The respondents thereupon approached the State Transport Authority and urged that even though permits had been granted to the Corporation, they were entitled to ply on the routes in question in pursuance of the permits granted to them earlier. The State Transport Authority by its order dated 2-5-1978 upheld the respondents' contention and directed that the respondents shall be permitted to ply on the routes in respect of which temporary permits had been granted to them earlier. The petitioner thereupon filed a revision under Section 65-A before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal against the order of the State Transport Authority, dated May 2, 1978. The petitioner contended that since permits had been issued to the Corporation under Section 68-F (1-A) of the Act, the temporary permits granted to the respondent under Section 68-F (1-C) ceased to be effective and they were not entitled to ply their vehicles on the routes in question. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated April 16, 1979, dismissed the revision and upheld the order of the State Transport Authority. Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court by means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the aforesaid two orders.

(3.) Chapter IV-A of the Act contains special provisions relating to creation of monopoly in favour of the State Transport Undertaking for providing motor transport services on the routes in respect of which a scheme is framed in accordance with those provisions. Under Section 68-C the State Road Transport Undertaking may propose a scheme for the complete or partial exclusion of other persons for providing road Transport services on a route or area specified under the scheme. The scheme so proposed is required to be published in the official gazette. On the publication of the scheme the existing operators who may have been already providing transport facilities on the route or area are entitled to file objections which have to be heard by the State Government or an authority authorised by it under Section 68-C of the Act. After hearing objections, the hearing authority is empowered to approve, modify or reject the scheme. If the scheme is approved, it has to be published in the official gazette by the State Government and thereupon the scheme becomes final and it is known as ''approved scheme" and the route or area in respect of which the scheme is framed is called notified area or notified route. The scheme as finally published under Section 68-D (3) of the Act is statutory in nature and operates as law. Section 68-F (2) provides for the consequential steps which are to be taken by the Transport Authorities constituted under the Act for the purpose of giving effect to the approved scheme which contemplate cancellation or curtailment of an existing permit and refusal to entertain any application for grant or renewal of any permit. Section 68-F (1) of the Act lays down that if a State Transport Undertaking applies for grant of a permit in pursuance of an approved scheme the Transport Authority constituted under the Act shall issue such permits to the Undertaking notwithstanding anything contained to the contrary in Chap. IV of the Act. These provisions have been enacted by the Parliament for giving effect to an approved scheme.