DASHMESH TRACTOR TROLLEY UNION Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions raise common questions of law and facts and therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE petitioners in these writ petitions are seeking to quash the amendment of Rule 2 of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules 1993 adding clauses (b) and (c) to Rule 2 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and also to issue a direction to the respondents to renew their goods carriage permits.

(3.) THE petitioners are owners of tractors and trailers. They are carrying the trade of tractors and trailers as goods carriers. The petitioners have obtained public carrier permits to carry the goods as required under the provisions of the Act. The grouse of the petitioners is that because of the addition of the definition in the rules defining the Agricultural Tractor and Trailer, the authorities are treating all the tractors and trailers as agricultural tractors and agricultural trailers falling within the purview of Rule 2 (b) and (c) and they are refusing to renew the public carrier permits or issue fresh permits to the tractors/trailers though they are not used for agricultural purposes and are only use for carrying the goods. The contention of the petitioners is that the definitions added in the rules are contrary to the provisions of the main Act namely Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and, therefore, the provisions of Rule 2 (b) and (c) are ultra vires of the rule making power and, therefore, liable to be quashed. Consequently they also pray that the respondents be directed to renew their public carrier permits or issue l'resh permits under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.