ARUN KUMAR LATH Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER introduction of Chapter IV-A in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 the State of Madhya Pradesh published Scheme No. 89 under Section 68-C of that Act on 30-9-1983 which includes a portion of the route from Bilaspur to Korba via Katghora. The Scheme is still pending finalisation under Section 68-D of the Act. In view of Section 68-F (l-D), falling under that Chapter, no regular permits could be granted or renewed on this route. However, during the pendency of such a scheme, the needs of the travelling public are to be served by issue of temporary permits. The petitioner had been obtaining temporary permits on the route Bilaspur to Parsabhata including a distance of 3 Kilometers from Balco to Parsabhata not covered under the notified scheme, for a period of four months each. However, one of such applications for grant of temporary permits was rejected by the Regional Transport Authority by order dated 2-1-1989. The petitioner alleges that this has been done following the decisions of this Court in M. P. No. 2979 of 1988 and M. P. No. 2885 of 1988, in which directions are contained not to grant continuous temporary permits but to invite applications for grant of regular permits. The petitioner informs the Court despite the aforesaid two decisions by this Court, temporary permit has been granted on route Bilsapur to Balco in favour of one Hakimuddin. While granting this temporary permit, the R. T. A. referred to a decision of this Court in Misc. Petition No. 3290 of 1983, where such temporary grant has been maintained. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was thus a conflict in the views taken by this Court in the matter of grant of temporary permit, pending finalisation of the scheme, proposed under Section 68-D of the Act. By order dated, 23-6-1989, Hon'ble the Chief Justice was requested to form a larger Bench for resolving the controversy. This is how the matter comes before this Full Bench. Similar question also arises for decision in Miscellaneous Petition No. 2569 of 1989 and Miscellaneous Petition No. 2433 of 1989.

(2.) SHRI Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioner, addressed the Court on behalf of the petitioner in Miscellaneous Petition No. 2569/89 and Misc. Petition No. 2433/89, while Shri Rawat addressed on behalf of the petitioner is Misc. Petition No. 531 of 1989. Shri V. S. Dabir argued on behalf of the M. P. State Road Transport Corporation. Shri Hassan, while opening his address, formulated the following two questions to be resolved :

(3.) TO answer these questions, one has to notice the scheme in Chapter IV-A of the Act. As the heading of the Chapter itself indicates, the provisions falling thereunder have been specially carved out in relation to the State Transport Undertakings. They are in addition to the other provisions, which may also apply to such undertakings. However, as appears from Section 68-B, this provision in Chapter IV-A and the rules and orders made thereunder have over-riding effect over other provisions in the Act, in their application to the State Transport Undertakings, but only to the extent of inconsistency between them and the provisions under Chapter IV-A. Thus Chapter IV-A may not be a self-contained code by itself. The other provisions of the Act in so far as the language warrants also apply in relation to proceedings under Chapter IV-A, except in so far as they may be expressly or by reason of repugnance or inconsistency, overridden. (See Mohd. Ashfaq v. S. T. A. T, U. P, AIR 1976 SC 2161 ). Section 68-C permits a State Transport Undertaking/corporation to prepare a scheme and get the same published in official gazette and in such manner as the State Government may direct, specifying any area or route or a portion thereof to be run and operated by that undertaking, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of other persons or otherwise. After considering the objections to such proposed scheme and after hearing the objectors, the scheme so proposed may be approved or modified and then the approved or modified scheme is required to be published under Section 68-D (3) and on such publication it becomes final and is called the approved scheme. Then, by force of Section 68-F (1), the R. T. A. , on the application by the State Transport Undertaking, shall issue a stage carriage permit or a public carrier's permit or a contract carriage permit in respect of that notified area or notified route to such transport undertaking, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Chapter IV. With a, view to regulate grant of temporary permits during the pendency and consideration of the scheme published under Section 68-C, Section 68-F was amended to incorporate sub-sections (1-A to 1-D) with effect from 2-3-1970. These provisions may be quoted :