DIBAKAR SAHU Vs. S T A WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A supplementary Reciprocal Transport Agreement was entered into by and between the State of West Bengal and the State of Orissa in accordance with the provisions of Section 63(3B) of the preceding Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, in view of the contiguity of the two States and for the purpose of development of inter-State traffic and the same, being Notification No.10709-WT dated 17/09/1986, was published in the Calcutta Gazette, Extraordinary, dated 25/10/1986. It has not been, as it cannot be, disputed that the said Reciprocal Agreement, though made under the provisions of the preceding Act of 1939, is still validly operative and shall be deemed to have been made under the corresponding provision of Section 88 of the present Motor Vehicles Act of 1988, in view of Section 217 thereof. Both under Section 88(6) of the present Act of 1988, as was under Section 63(3B) of the preceding Act of 1939, "the State Transport Authority of the State and the Regional Transport Authority concerned shall give effect to it", any contrary provisions in the Act notwithstanding.

(2.) Under the said Agreement, the Route Jajpur to Karagpur has been extended up to Calcutta and though only one permit has been provided for, the number of trips provided are nevertheless two.

(3.) The petitioner had one permit for the original Route Jajpur-Kharagpur before extension and has still now only one permit for the Route after extention to Calcutta. He cannot, or for the matter of that, no one can, have more than one permit, that being the number fixed for the Route under the Agreement. But, as already noted, the Agreement nevertheless authorises one permit-holder to have two trips. Two trips would obviously mean two trips on the same day, as otherwise the second trip on the next or some other day would become a single trip on that day.