DEVA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner submitted an application for grant of interregional permit under Section 70 (1) read with Section 80 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for shorf'the Act of 1988") on 11-9-2002 for the route between Loonkaransar and Karansar. At that time, no route was opened by the State Government from Loonkaransar to Karansar for which the petitioner sought permit by his application dated 10-10-2002. However, the District Transport Officer, Bikaner proposed for opening of the same route Loonkaransar to Karansar vide his proposal dated 19-2-2002, therefore, the application of the petitioner for the route was after the proposal sent by the District Transport Officer for opening the said route. The State Government opened the route vide notification dated 28-9-2002. The petitioner's application though filed before opening of the route was considered by the Regional Transport Authority (RTA) and permit was granted to the petitioner for the said route on 31-12-2003. The respondent No. 4 Sawai Singh preferred a revision petition before the State Transport Appellate Authority (STAT) against the order of RTA dated 19-10-2003. In revision two grounds were taken by the respondent No. 4. One was that the petitioner's vehicle was under-model. That ground was rejected by the revisional authority. The second ground for challenge was that the petitioner submitted application for grant of permit before opening of route by the State Government, therefore, that application, being pre-mature, could not have been considered for grant of permit for a route which came into existence only subsequent to filing of the application by the petitioner. On that ground, the respondent No. 4 succeeded and the STAT by the impugned order dated 12-11-2003 cancelled the permit of the petitioner's vehicle.

(3.) According to learned counsel for the petitioner as per the provisions of law which were in force before coming into force of the Act of 1988, the procedure for grant of stage carriage permit was given in Sections 46 to 48 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short "the Act of 1939") and for contract carriage permit, procedure is given in Section 57 of the Act of 1939. As per Section 57 (2) of the Act of 1939, an application for stage carriage permit or a public carrier's permit could be made not less than six weeks before the date on which the applicant desired that the permit shall take effect or in a case where the Regional Transport Authority appoints the date for receipt of the application, then on such dates. On receipt of said application, the RTA is required to complete the formalities as required by the clauses made under Section 57 of the Act of 1939. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, under the provisions of the Act of 1939, there were restrictions and permits were not available just on asking for permit as is the position after coming into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the Act of 1988 has radically changed the entire scheme of grant of permit for transport vehicle. Now anyone can obtain permit for any route and permit can be granted that too for asking and there is no limit on number of permit for any route. Therefore, it is immaterial when application for obtaining permit was submitted, when there was tough competition in the trade and permits for a route were limited, than Hon'ble Supreme Court held that transparency is required in procedure for granting permits. Now there is no chance of corruption and any number of permits can be granted for any route.