P RAVINDRANATH REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeal Nos.233 and 239 of, 1991 are directed against interlocutory orders passed by a learned Single Judge in WVMP Nos.213 and 229 of 1991 in WPMP Nos.18648 and 18644 of 1990 in Writ Petition Nos.14532 and 14530 of 1990 vacating the interim directions granted earlier by another learned single Judge by which the Regional Transport Authorities were directed to release the vehicles seized by them for contravention of the provisions of Section 192 of the Motor Vehicles Act provided in respect of each of the seized vehicles a sum of rupees one thousand was deposited. At the request of the learned counsel for both sides the main writ petitions themselves are taken up for hearing along with the connected writ petitions. In writ petitions - Writ Petition Nos.14530 and 14811 of 1990 and 4045 and4196 of 1991 -the petitioners are challenging the constitutionality of sub-section (1) of Sec.200 and sub-section (1) of Section 207 at the Motor Vehicles Act; in other writ petitions, the legality of G.O.Ms.No.108 dated 12-4-1996 and C.O.Rt. No.947 dated 4-8-1990 are challenged. As common questions arise in all these writ petitions, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the same by this common judgment.

(2.) All the petitioners herein are transport operators holding contract carriage permits. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.4045 of 1991 exclusively hold All India Contract Carriage permits. According to the petitioners, the writ petitions came to be filed in the following circumstances. By G.O.Ms,No.l08, Transport, Roads and Buildings, dated 12-4-1990, the Government have notified officers not below the rank of Assistant Motor Vehicles' Inspectors of the Transport Department and officers not below the rank of the Sub-Inspectors of Police (Traffic) of the Police Department in the twin cities, and Inspectors of Police in other places to compound the offences under Sections 177,178,179,180,181, 182, sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 183, Sections 184,186,189,191,192,194, 196 and 198 and also prescribed the minimum amounts to be collected by the aforesaid officers while compounding the offences. For misuse of contract carriage, having more than 13 seats, as a stage carriage, an offence punishable under Section 192(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the minimum amount of compounding fee prescribed is Rs.500/-. The proviso to paragraph 2 of G.O.Ms.No. 108 dated 12-4-1990 lays down that "for every second and subsequent offence committed by the same person, where some recorded evidence te forthcoming, thecompoundable amount shall be multiple of the quantum fixed for the offence multiplied by the number of the offences (i.e., first, second, third and so on)". By G.O.Rt.No.947, an addendum was issued to the notification covered by G.O.Ms.No.108 to the effect that after the abovesaid proviso, the following clause shall be added, namely,

(3.) Section 127-B of the repealed Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, provided for composition of certain offences. The nature of the offences compoundable under the old Act and the new Act are one and the same. The two Government orders were issued under the old Act - G.O.Ms.No.394 dated 27-8-1983 and G.O.Ms.No.1173 dated 11-11-1987 - under which the amount prescribed for compounding was Rs.250/-. Even after the new Act came into force, by G.O.Ms.No.220 dated 14-8-1989, the amount prescribed for compounding was only Rs.250/-. By the impugned G.O.Ms.No.108 dated 12-4-1990, the compoundable amount was enhanced from Rs,250/- to Rs.500/- without stating any reasons.