MUKESH KUMAR Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer that the respondent R.T.A., Ghaziabad be directed not to grant or issue any permit on the route Khurja-Shikarpur Jahangirabad and allied route.

(2.) The aforesaid route falls exclusively with the jurisdiction of the R.T.A., Ghaziabad.

(3.) The petitioner is an operator on the said route and obviously, he does not want others to be granted a permit on the said route. In this connection, it may be noted that under Section 47 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 strength of the route could be fixed by the R.T.A. This concept of strength has been deliberately omitted in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and now there is no concept of strength. It is obvious that the intention of omitting any provision analogous to Section 47 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was that there should be competition because under the old Act, the existing operators would obstruct grant of permits on their routes on the basis of the strength fixed by the R.T.A., and thus, they created a monopoly in their favour. This was obviously not in the interest of the public as competition ensures that the rates are kept at a reasonably low level and the quality of service provided is good. Since there was a policy of liberalisation in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 this Court cannot obstruct the aforesaid the said policy of Parliament.