BAL MUKUND Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is a bus route from Bhilwara to Deoli via Mandal, Shahpura and jahajpur (hereinafter referred to as "the route" ). The petitioner is an existing operator of the route. The portion of the route from Bhilwara to Shahpura-Chauraya is part of the notified routes from Ajmer to Bhilwara and Ajmer to udaipur via Bhilwara, while a draft scheme of nationalisation in respect of bhilwara-Deoli route has been published under Section 68 C of the Indian Motor vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), in the Rajasthan rajpatra dated April 3, 1976 and the same is still under consideration of the state Government. According to the petitioner, the State Transport Authority, rajasthan vide its resolution dated 6/7th Aug. 1970 fixed a limit of 20 permits on the route and according to him 21 vehicles are operating on the route at present, including that of the petitioner.

(2.) THE Rajasthan State Road Transport Corooration (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation") applied for grant of 21 temporary permits on the route and the R. T. A. , Udaipur (hereinafter called "the R. T. A. ") by its order dated Oct. 27, 1977 granted 21 temporary permits to the Corporation, which were issued on nov. 8, 1977. But this is common ground between the parties that the Corporation did not ply any vehicle on any one of the 21 permits granted to it by the resolution of the R. T. A. dated Oct. 27, 1977. However, on the expiry of the period of earlier temporary permits obtained by the Corporation, it again applied on March 3, 1978 for the grant of 21 temporary permits on the route. The R. T. A. again granted 21 temporary permits to the Corporation for a period of four months by its order dated March 13, 1978. In pursuance of the aforesaid order of the R. T. A. , 21 permits were issued to the Corporation by the secretary, R. T. A. on March 16, 1978, which are valid from March 8, 1978 to july 7, 1978. The aforesaid grant of temporary permits to the Corportion by the order of the R. T. A. dated March 13, 1978 is challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition.

(3.) THE first submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in this case, is that the R. T. A. had no jurisdiction to grant temporary permits to the Corporation under the provisions of Section 68 F (1-A) as amended by the rajasthan Act No. 10 of 1974 and 68f (1-AA), which was newly added by the aforesaid Rajasthan Act. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner such a temporary permit could only be granted by the State Transport authority, Rajasthan, which alone had the authority to issue a permit under the aforesaid provisions. Sub-section (1-A) of Section 68f of the Act, as amended in Rajasthan, authorised the S. T. A. or the R. T. A, as the case may be, to issue a temporary permit as prayed for by the State Transport Undertaking in the circumstances specified in that subsection. Similarly, Sub-section (1-AA) of section 68f of the Act also authorises the R. T. A. or S. T. A. , as the case may be, to grant a temporary permit prayed for by the State Transport Undertaking in respect of any route which comprises of a notified route or area or portion thereof and of any other route or area or portion thereof, specified in any scheme or schemes published under Section 68 C of the Act Thus, both the S. T. A. and the R. T. A. are competent to issue temporary permits under Subsections (1-A) and (1-AA) of Section 68 F of the Act, in their respective jurisdictions.