BANTASINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the legality of Rule 49-A of the Central Provinces and Berar Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940.

(2.) THE petitioner, Sardar Bantasingh, is a transport operator and carries on business in partnership, mainly at Jabalpur and Raipur, in the name and style of punjab Sikh Regular Motor Service and Jabalpur Development Transport Co. , jabalpur. The Raipur Transport Co. (Private), Ltd. , Raipur, which also carries On the same business and had made an application to be joined as a respondent, was allowed to anpear as an intervener and was heard. The respondents are (i) The state of Madhya Pradesh, (ii) The State Transport Authority, Madhya Pradesh, at jabalpur, and (iii) and (iv ). The Regional Transport Authorities at Jabalpur and raipur. The return has, however, been filed by the State Government alone, as It is mainly concerned with the dispute.

(3.) RULE 49-A of the C. P. and Berar Motor Vehicles Rules 1940, was made by the state Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Subsection (1) of section 68 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (hereinafter called the Act), and was published in the official Gazette under Notification No. 879-1078-IV. MV, dated 2910-1956. It is in these terms: