Skip to content


Karnataka State Private Buses Employee's Union Vs. Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Transport, Goveronment of Karnataka and Anr. (06.08.1982 - KARHC) - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectMotor Vehicles
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petn. No. 27373 of 1982
Judge
Reported inAIR1983Kant270
ActsConstitution of India - Article 226; Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Sections 24; Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1963 - Rule 82(3)
AppellantKarnataka State Private Buses Employee's Union
RespondentCommissioner and Secretary, Department of Transport, Goveronment of Karnataka and Anr.
Advocates:B.A. Raja Rao Sindhe, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....filed by the parties for grant of land, the single judge has exercised his discretionary power and directed the assistant commissioner to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of land and imposed cost writ appeal held, the way in which the matter is being handled warrants imposition of costs in the appeal also. order of the single judge is justified. - 48 of the karnataka motor vehicles rules, numerous accidents take place in which event, the employees such as the drivers and the conductors are also killed or injured as well as other road users. 3. while i appreciate the anxiety of the petitioner-union to protect its members as well as the members of the public, the matter is outside the purview of art. merely because the representation made has not met with any..........the transport vehicles coming for registration and inspection under the provisions of karnataka motor vehicles rules and also to subject such vehicles to inspection before fitness certificate is issued and further issue direction to restrict the issuance of fitness certificates to only those vehicles which are fit in accordance with the rules under the motor vehicle rules.2. it is alleged that there is no adequate staff in the regional transport authority of bangalore in particular and generally in the state for purposes of carrying out the inspection of the vehicles before fitness certificate is issued. it is further alleged that it is on account of the paucity of officers and indifference in making proper check of the vehicles as directed in form no. 48 of the karnataka motor.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. In this petition, the Karnataka State Private Buses Employees' Union, has prayed for an Order in the nature of mandamus to subject the transport vehicles coming for registration and inspection under the provisions of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules and also to subject such vehicles to inspection before fitness certificate is issued and further issue direction to restrict the issuance of fitness certificates to only those vehicles which are fit in accordance with the rules under the Motor Vehicle Rules.

2. It is alleged that there is no adequate staff in the Regional Transport Authority of Bangalore in particular and generally in the State for purposes of carrying out the inspection of the vehicles before fitness certificate is issued. It is further alleged that it is on account of the paucity of officers and indifference in making proper check of the vehicles as directed in form No. 48 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, numerous accidents take place in which event, the employees such as the Drivers and the Conductors are also killed or injured as well as other road users. These assertions are made in the averments made in the petition. But no material is placed before this Court except the affidavit that is stated to have been filed in Contempt Case No. 249 of 1981 in which the accused therein who is a Regional Transport Officer employed by the State Government has stated that out of 13 Senior Inspection available in Bangalore district only 4 are allotted for carrying out the work of inspection before recommending issuance of fitness certificates. It is on the basis of that and the other allegations that the petitioner wants this Court to issue a mandamus to the respondents to property carry out their duties.

3. While I appreciate the anxiety of the petitioner-union to protect its members as well as the members of the public, the matter is outside the purview of Art. 226 of the Constitution inasmuch as it is a pure matter of administration which the Home Department of the State should attend to. Merely because the representation made has not met with any success is no reason why this Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution. If no account of fitness certificates granted by callous indifferent officers and without proper inspection, which acts result in accidents it amounts to criminal negligence on the part of the authorities concerned. The petitioner and the concerned can always lodge criminal complaints in the appropriate forum. Therefore, it is not a fit case for interference by this court.

4. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

5. Petition dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //