AMAR KUMAR NAIK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who at all material time were and still are operators of 3b and 3d Bus routes moved this Hon'ble Court on 13th May, 1975 against a notice which is in Annexure "a" to the petition, intimating that applications have been received for introduction of contract carriage (Mini Buses) from (1) Milk Colony to anderson House via Shambazar five point, Central Avenue, B. B. D. Bag, esplanade, Jawaharlal Nehuru Road, acharya Prafulla Chandra Road, Bekar road, (in place of the existing route,, milk Colony to B. B. D. Bag), (2) Tala park to Kidderpore via Shambazar five point, Bidhan Sarani, B. B. D. Bag. , jawaharlal Nehru Road, Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Road and Kidder pore Bridge (in place of the existing route Tala Park to B. B. D. Bag ). (3)Ganguly Bagan. to B. B. D. Bag (in place of the existing route Bagha Jaffa to B. B. D. Bag), (4) Rathtolla to b. B. D. Bag via Rash Behari Avenue shyama Prosad Mukherjee Road, A. T. Mukherjee Road and Esplanade (in place of the existing alignment at Ballygunge station, Rash Behari Avenue, gariahat Road, Amir Ali Avenue ). It was informed that representations, if any, under section 50 of the Motor vehicle Act, 1939, which should be filed by 19th April 1975, would be heard at 3 p. m. on 23rd April, 1975. By the said notice it was also informed that the intending objectors may appear before the Regional Transport Authority at the date and time as proposed and no separate intimation would be sent to them regarding such date of hearing. At the time of issuing the Rule, this court was pleased to issue an ad-interim order of injunction restraining the the respondents from giving any further effect to the impugned resolutions dated 23rd April, 1975 for a period of 8 weeks with liberty to the petitioners to apply for extension of the said interim order on notice to the respondent no. 2 viz. , the Regional Transport Authority, Calcutta region.

(2.) THEREAFTER, an application for addition of parties was filed on 7th July, 1975 and on 21st July, 1975 the said application for addition of parties was; allowed and directions were given to effect service of the Rule on the parties so added. In the- meantime, the petitioners filed an application dated 3rd July, 1975, for extension of the aforementioned interim order and this court was pleased on 21st July, 1975. to adjourn the hearing of the said application for 3 weeks with a direction to complete the affidavits in the said application in the meantime and further directed that the interim order-already granted would continue till the disposal of the application. The said application along with another application filed by the added respondent for having the interim order vacated, came up for hearing on 10th November, 1975, when considering the urgency of the matter, this Court directed that the connected Rule should be heard as expeditiously as possible.

(3.) THE Buses in the said 3b and 3d routes ply on the routes and points as mentioned hereunder : 3b : New Alipore - Gopal Nagar Road - Kalighat Bridge -Hazra Road - Ashutosh Mukherjee Road - Chowringhee - Esplanade - Milk Colony - Belgachia. 3d : Taratoalla - Diamond Harbour Road Junction up to Amherst street - Mahatma Gandhi Road -A. P. C. Road - Milk Colony -Belgatchia. the petitioners have alleged that as the routes as mentioned hereinbefore are within notified routes, no permanent permit could virtually be issued on the said routes and as a result thereof temporary permits are issued for every 17 weeks under section 62 read with sections 68 H. A. of the said Act on due observance of the formalities as required. They have further alleged that from the alignment of the routes as mentioned hereinbefore it would be clear that they do not pass through the thickly populated areas of the city in comparison to other bus routes. It has further been alleged that although the sanctioned strength of the Buses in the route are 38 but they are not plying in full strength as some of the operators have withdrawn their vehicles for reasons best known to them. It has been alleged that in view of the difficulties as is being experienced by the operators in the routes in question, the Regional Transport Authority concerned took a very sympathetic view of the matter and assured them that proposals for having the said routes extended would be considered very shortly. But it has also been alleged by the petitioners that such proposals have not yet been given a shape. The petitioners have also alleged that the introduction of a new type of transport vehicle which is known "mini Bus" on different routes of Calcutta have also created additional crisis not only to them but also in cases of other operators in other routes. They have alleged that permits to those Mini Buses are given as "contract carriages" and such grant is not only illegal and irregular but the same is being made in colorable exercise of powers of the authorities concerned and in fact on proper appreciation of facts and application of law and mind, there would be no doubt that those Mini buses are not contract carriages but in fact they are stage carriages with special amenities. It has further been alleged by the petitioners that like stage carriages, the Mini Buses stop at every stoppages, charge fares stage by stage at higher rates and pick up passengers and drop them at every stop pages which incidentally was not the object of the scheme formulated for the purpose of introducing Mini Buses and intact such an act on the part of the pliers of the Mini Buses at the instance, help and assistance of the authorities concerned, is not only unauthorised but such act has frustrated the very object of the scheme as mentioned above and full particulars whereof would be available hereinafter.