STEEL EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION REGD Vs. DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY VISAKHAPATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) writ petition is directed against the order dated 30-12-1996 by which the Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Visakhapatnam held that the petitioner had utilised the vehicle as a contract carriage, for which a private service vehicle permit was given and, therefore, the petitioner was liable to pay the difference in tax amounting to Rs. 11-50 per seat for the quarter ending 31-12-1996. In the petition, it is alleged that the vehicle was registered as AP.31/T. 2994 with a private service vehicle permit for the purpose of transporting the members of the petitioner Association from residence to the work spot and back and the demand is in contradiction to the permit given to the petitioner. In the Counter affidavit it is stated that on a check conducted on 27-11-1996, it was found that the members of the Association were contributing Rs. 200.00pcr month to the Organizing Secretary and that the Association having no trade or business, was found to have misused the vehicle as a contract carriage violating the pennit conditions stipulated in respect of the private service vehicle.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Association itself is the owner of the vehicle and thereby, every member of the Association is also deemed to be the owner of the bus. They were sharing the expenses for maintaining the bus which was used for carrying them from residence to office and back. The learned Counsel submitted that since such purpose has been declared in the application for obtaining the permit, and the manner in which it was used was in confirmity with the permit granted, there was no violation for which any penalty can be imposed by way of collection of excess tax as if the vehicle was being plied as a contract carriage.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Transport submits that according to the definition of 'private service vehicle' under Section 2(33) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (sic 1988) (for short, 'the Act'), a vehicle can be treated as such only if it is used by the owner for the purpose of carrying persons for or in connection with any trade or business otherwise than for hire or business and in this particular case, the spot inspection showed that the Association, which was the owner, did not have any trade or business and the persons who are travelling had paid a sum of Rs.200.00 per head which amounted to hire or reward, contrary to the definition of private service vehicle. He, therefore, submitted that the vehicle must be treated as being utilised as a contract carriage, for which the owner is liable to pay higher taxes and, therefore, the demand was justified.