WESTERN BUS SERVICE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the very outset it calls for a mention that inter alia the writ petition questions the permission granted to the respondent No. 6 which dates back to 22nd of June, 2006 alleging it to be violative of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act but during the course of the argument the learned Counsel has given up the challenge, therefore, need not be addressed to. Thus the controversy restricts to the challenge that the statutory authority cannot grant a Stage Carrier Permit unless Petitioner -Western Bus Association Baramulla is heard. On the said assumption a restraint is sought to be placed on the Regional Transport Officer Srinagar -Respondent No. 4 from issuing the permit. The relief is founded on sub Section 2 of Section 71 of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 extracted hereunder: 71. Procedure of Regional Transport Authority in considering application for stage carriage permit.

(2.) A plain reading of the section aforementioned makes it clear that it relates to the speed at which a vehicle has to be driven and the timetable proposed should not be in contravention of the provisions of the Act. The provision extracted above envisages a remedy before the Authority which has granted the permission. It provides further that an application for grant of Stage Carriage Permit cannot be rejected outrightly but an opportunity has to be granted to the applicant aspiring for permit. Thus section prevents arbitrary rejection of the applications of the new entrants but it does not enshrine an opportunity of being heard to the existing operators before granting permission to the new entrants.

(3.) NEXT it was contended that the Regional Transport Officer has no power to change the timetable. To appreciate the contention reference to clause (v) sub Section 2 of Section 11 of the Motor Vehicles Act becomes imperative, which reads: 72. Grant of stage carriage permits: