K GOPALA KRISHNAYYA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are filed by several persons carrying on motor transport business in Krishna District for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash a common scheme No. T6/10/57 dated 5-11-1957 published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette as approved by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G. 0. Ms. No. 58 Home (Transport IV) dated 7-1-1958 and published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, Part II (Extraordinary) dated 9-1-1958. The State of Andhra Pradesh published a scheme, for the purpose of providing an efficient, adequate, economical and properly co-ordinate transport service in the public interest to operate the transport services mentioned therein with effect from a date to he notified by the Government. This was done in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act as amended by the Act 100 of 1956 which introduced Chapter IV-A into the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939. The transport service specified In the scheme covers all the routes till now operated by the petitioners. The petitioners filed. objections to the approval of the scheme by the Government. They were heard on 26-12-1957 and 27-12-1957 by the Secretary, Home and Transport Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh. Meanwhile, the Government decided to establish a road transport corporation under the Central Act 64/1950 for the State of Andhra Pradesh and to transfer the assets of the Transport Department to the said State Transport Corporation. Pursuant to this, the Government constituted the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation for the State of Andhra Pradesh under Section 3 of the Central Act (64 of 1950). By G. O. Ms. 58, dated 7-1-1958, the scheme was approved by the Governor of Andhra Pradesh without any modification and this was to come into force from 10-1-1958. By another order dated 11-1-1958, the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation was empowered to take over the management of the existing Road Transport Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, and to enforce the scheme approved as aforementioned. It is at this stage that the petitioners have approached this Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Since all the petitions raise common questions of law and fact, they can be disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) Two broad grounds are raised in support of these petitions (1) that the provisions of Chapter IV-A (Amending Act 100 of 1956) are ultra vires the Constitution; and (2) even if that Chapter is intra vires, the scheme is vitiated by reason of the non-compliance with the procedure laid down by the Act.

(3.) Chapter IV-A of Act 100 of 1956 is impugned on three grounds, namely, that it is a colourable legislation, that it constitutes a fetter on the power of the Parliament to enact future legislations and that by Section 68-B of that Act the Parliament had delegated its authority to a subordinate agency to repeal some of the existing statutes which is hit at by Articles 245 and 246 of the Constitution.