MOHAMMAD KHAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three writ petitions are connected and can be disposed of together. In W.P. No. 11427/89 there is a single petitioner-Mohd. Khan. In W.P. No. 6960 of 1989, the petitioner is the State Motor Transport Operators Association. In W.P. No. 977 of 1990, the petitioner is M/ s. Hyderabad Local Lorry Owners Union. All the petitioners are impugning the validity of G.O. Ms. No. 122, Transport, Roads and Buildings (Tr. II) Department dated 30-3-1988 in so far as it insists upon the persons having a valid registration certificate under the provisions of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. The Motor Transport workers Act, 1961 is an Act to provide for the welfare of motor transport workers and to regulate the conditions of their work. S. 3 of that Act provides for registration of motor transport undertakings. S. 2(g) defines motor transport undertaking. The said Act as stated in S. 1(4) applies to every motor transport undertaking employing five or more motor transport workers. The State Government is empowered to issue a notification applying the provisions of the Act to any motor transport undertaking employing less than five motor transport workers. It is not in dispute that by virtue of G.O.Ms. No. 1624, Home dated 11-10-1968 the State Government extended the Act applying the same to motor transport undertakings employing less than five motor transport workers. The petitioner in W.P. No. 11427 of 1989 and the members of the associations covered by the other two writ petitions contend that they are all drivers of their own vehicles and that they have not employed any motor transport workers so far. Their grievance is that inspite of the same, they are now required by the amendment introduced in G.O.Ms. No. 122, dated 30-3-1988 to produce not only a certificate of registration under the Motor Vehicles Act and a valid certificate of insurance, but also a certificate of registration under the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. R. 13-A deals with the manner of payment of tax under the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. The petitioners' grievance is that inspite of their not employing any workmen, they are compelled to produce a certificate of registration under the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 and that inasmuch as they are unable to produce the same, there is difficulty in payment of tax and they will not be able to ply their vehicles. They contend that rules can be made under the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act only for the purpose of that Act, but no rule can be framed for purposes connected with the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961.

(2.) In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Government and others, it is stated that the petitioners are put to strict proof of the allegation that they are all drivers of their own vehicles and have not employed any other person with or without wages. With reference to some of the members of the petitioners association, it is pointed out that some of them are having more than one Vehicles while some are ladies and that it is not possible to accept a general statement that all the persons are using their vehicles without employing any workmen. It is clarified that if in fact the transport vehicles are run only by owners-cum-drivers and no one else is engaged, then the said persons need not have to get their vehicles registered under the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. The respondents however contended that the amendment introduced in R. 13-A of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules in valid. R. 13-A has been amended in furtherance of the objects of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 and the Motor Transport Workers Rules. The impugned amendment does not in any way offend the provisions of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act or the Rules as a valid certificate of registration under the Motor Vehicles Act and a valid insurance have even previously been required to be produced at the time of payment of tax. A further requirement has now been introduced that the person paying tax should also produce a certificate of registration under the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. The impugned amendment is in the interests of public in general and the motor workers and is not illegal or unconstitutional.

(3.) Sri S. L. Chennakesava Rao, learned counsel for some of the petitioners and Sri B. Madhava Reddy contended that u/S. 16(1) of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963, no rule like R. 13-A could be introduced for the purpose of achieving the objects of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961, or the rules made thereunder. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader and Sri P. Venkateswarlu, for the Workers Union, that the rule made under, the provisions of the A. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963 cannot be said to be outside the purposes of the said Act. It is argued that under the Taxation Act, a licence is given in respect of the vehicle for use thereof in a public place and such user must be lawful. It is open to the State to impose such limitations on the user of the vehicle as will subserve not only the purposes of the taxation statute but other cognate enactments. At the time of payment of tax, the vehicle must have a Certificate of Insurance as provided in S. 107 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (now S. 159 of 1988 Act), and R. 13-A of the Rules made under the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963. The payment of tax is a point at which, the statutory authorities can have a check in regard compliance with provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. In the same manner, it is open to the Government to make a rule imposing a check in respect of compliance with the provisions of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961. It does not matter whether the condition is laid down in the A.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act or Rules made thereunder, or in the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules made thereunder on in the Motor Vehicles Transport Workers Act and the Rules made thereunder. A licence under the taxation Act can be refused if there is violation of any provision relating to safety of the vehicle, road users as also the workers employed for in the use of the vehicle. The Workers Act is a piece of welfare legislation and the courts must interpret the law in a manner which leads to its virus being upheld.