KRIPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY these seven writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the validity of the various draft schemes for nationlisation of Motor Transport Service under Section 68C of the Moter Vehicles Act (hereinafter called the M.V Act) has been challenged by the operators of the affected routes on various grounds, I had issued a notice to the respondents to show cause why the petitions be not admitted and in answer to that, Dr. L.M. Singhvi, learned Advocate General, Mr. M D. Purohit, learned Deputy Government Advocate and Mr. R.N. Munshi, appeared for the respondents.

(2.) CIVIL Writ Petition Nos. 881 of 1973 (S. Kripalsingh v. State of Rajasthan) and 1447 of 1973 (Messrs Gram Transport Service v. State of Rajasthan) pertain to the draft scheme relating to Jaipur Pilani route; Civil Writ Petitions Nos 825 of 1973 (Messrs Green Bus Service Private Limited v. State of Rajasthan) and 1448 of 1973 (Rajasthan Transport Corporation v. State of Rajasthan) relate to the proposed scheme under Section 68 -C of the M.V Act with regard to the Udaipur -Ratanpur route. Civil Writ Petition No. 926 of 1973 (Vasudev v. State or Rajasthan) relate to Jaipur Beawar route and Civil Writ Petitions No. 1500 of 1973 (Shankerlal v. State of Raj) and 1501 of 1173 (Rajasthan Motors v. State and Ors.) pertain to the draft scheme in respect to Udaipur Beawar route which according to the petitioner is not a route in existence

(3.) AS many common questions for law arise in all the writ petitions, it shall be convenient to dispose of them by a common judgment.