JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 64 of 1965 has come up before this Court on a reference by Hon'ble Jagat Narayan J.

(2.) THE facts leading to the reference and the circumstances under which the reference has been made may be briefly stated as follows - Petitioner Jagdish Prasad applied for grant of a fresh permit on the Beawar-Bijainagar via Sheopura Ghata route on 30th July, 1962. This application was published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra of 30th August, 1962, and objections were invited under sec, 57 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Respondent No. 3 Tarachand Tak, who was one of the eight existing operators of Beawar-Bijainagar via Sheopura Ghata route, filed objections against the grant of permit to the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned Government Advocate pointed out: - (1) Sec. 68-B in Chapter IV-A of the Act provides that the provisions of the chapter and the rules and orders made thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in Chapter IV of this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument; (2) that sec. 68-G (2) provides for the offer of permit for an alternative route or area in lieu of monetary compensation payable on account of cancellation of existing terms or modifications of the terms thereof ; (3) that under sec. 43 (i) (iii) of the Act added and substituted by Act 100 of 1956, State Government may having regard to the circumstances mentioned in sec. 43 from time to time by notification in the official gazette, issue directions to the State Transport Authority regarding the grant of permits for alternative routes or areas, to persons in whose cases the existing permits are cancelled or the terms thereof are modified in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-sec. (2) of sec. 68-F ; and contended that the directions for the grant of permits for alternative routes or areas should be considered an administrative act. Reliance was placed upon the observations of a Bench decision of this Court in Abdul Gafoor vs. State of Raj. (2) where the granting of permits for alternative routes or areas under sec. 43 (i) (iii) was treated as valid and a more suitable method. In this connection it was also suggested that the State Government can issue directions in connection with the grant of permits for alternative routes or areas under this provision irrespective of the controversy whether the grant of permits for alternative routes or areas is a quasi-judicial function or an administrative function. For the same reasons it was submitted that the State Transport Authority should also be held competent to issue such directions under sec. 44 (3) (a) of the Act for co-ordinating and regulating the activities and policies of the Regional Transport Authority.