SITA RAM RAI Vs. ZILA PARISHAD AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions raise common questions of law for decision. The petitioners in these writ petitions are holders of stage carriage permits for plying their stage carriages on various routes, parts of which fall within the District of Ghazipur and Varanasi. They have challenged the validity of the bye-laws framed by Zilla-' Parishad, Ghazipur in purported exercise of power under Sec. 239 (2) (F) of U- P. Kshetra Samitis and Zilla Parishads Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Adhiniyam) and as published in the-U. P. Gazette dated 5th of May, 1973. These bye-laws specify places for stands (Addas) and Paraos and for their regulation. These bye-laws provide that no vehicle shall stop at a place other than the places specified for stopping and halting of vehicles. Further, these provide for levy and charge of fee per trip for use of the specified stands and Paraos. In case of stage carriages, a fee in the sum of 50 P. per trip at every stand is chargeable.

(2.) The petitioners assert that the places specified by the impugned bye-laws are all on the roads belonging either to the Central Government or the State Government, under whose control and management these roads are, and the-Zilla Parishad has no concern with its control or management. It is further asserted that no construction had been made on these specified places and that no facility or amenity of any kind is provided. The petitioners have further asserted that the State Government is empowered to fix halting stations and parking places and that this power has been delegated to the District Magistrate who can specify these places, and, the Zilla Parishad, Ghazipur has no authority to do so. The right to collect fee has been auctioned in favour of certain contractors who collect fee from the petitioners, as well as others, plying vehicles, at the-rate of 50 P. per station per vehicle per trip, and the petitioners are being stopped forcibly and money is being charged with the connivance and consent of the-Zilla Parishad and this charge is illegal. The petitioners claim for quashing the bye-laws framed by the Zilla Parishad, and for the issue of a direction commanding the respondents not to give effect to these Bye-laws.

(3.) The case set up by the Z. P-is that the Parishad was fully entitled to frame the impugned bye-laws. It has been providing various facilities and amenities to the petitioners and public at large, and staff has been engaged for proper regulation of traffic etc- It has further been asserted that the fee in question is payable only in case of vehicles stopping at the specified place, and, if a vehicle does not so stop no charge of any fee is made.