FEROOZ JEHAN Vs. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition there are 19 petitioners, some of them have applied for the grant of a temporary permit each to the Regional Transport Authority, Moradabad and some of them have made similar applications to the Regional Transport Authority Kathgodam. Their grievance is that their applications are not being disposed of either by the two aforementioned Regional Transport Authorities or their respective Secretaries exercising delegated powers on the ground that the petitioners have not furnished two sureties so as to ensure the payment of the passenger tax if and when the same is due. The insistence upon the performance of such a condition by the petitioner is under challenge in this petition.

(2.) THE allegation is that the two Transport Authorities and their Secretaries are imposing the aforesaid condition at the direction of the Transport Commissioner of Uttar Pradesh. It is urged that the Transport Commissioner had no jurisdiction to issue such a direction. It is also urged that, in any case, the Transport Authorities or their Secretaries cannot act upon the directive of the Transport Commissioner while exercising quasi-judicial powers for the purposes of granting temporary permits.

(3.) SECTIONS 72 and 87 fall in Chapter V of the New Act. Section 96 of the New Act provides that the statement may make rules for the purposes of carrying into effect the provisions of Chapter V. The corresponding section under the Old Act is Section 68. So far, it appears, no Rules have been framed by the State Government under Section 96 of the New Act. Therefore, the rules framed under Section 68 of the Old Act will continue to operate. (Section 24 of the General Clauses Act).