Skip to content


Satyapal Bus Service, Sagar and anr. Vs. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Sagar and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectMotor Vehicles
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberMisc. Petn. No. 183 of 1978
Judge
Reported inAIR1978MP255
ActsMotor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Sections 44, 44(5) and 62(1); Madhya Pradesh Vehicles Rules, 1974 - Rule 70(1)
AppellantSatyapal Bus Service, Sagar and anr.
RespondentSecretary, Regional Transport Authority, Sagar and anr.
Appellant AdvocateS.Q. Hasan, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateA.G. Dhanda, Adv.
DispositionPetition dismissed
Cases ReferredPhoolchand v. Regional Transport Authority
Excerpt:
- - 7. the result, therefore, is that the writ petitions must fail and are dismissed......temporary permits.-- (1) a r.t.a. may, without following the pro-cedure laid down in section 57, grant permits, to be effective for a limited period not in any case to exceed four months, to authorise the use of a transport vehicle temporarily- (a) for the conveyance of passengers on special occasions such as to and from fairs and religious gatherings, or (b) for the purposes of a seasonal business, or (c) to meet a particular temporary need, or (d) pending decision on an application for renewal of a permit; and may attach to any such permit any condition it thinks fit,' 4. it is urged by shri hasan, learned counsel for some of the petitioners and shri b.k. rawal and shri p.c. naik, learned counsel appearing for the other petitioners, that sub-section (1) of section 62 deals with.....
Judgment:

A.P. Sen, C.J.

1. These five writ petitions raise a common question and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.

2. The short question for consideration is whether the Secretary, R.T.A., is competent to grant timings to a temporary permit issued under Clause (a) to (d) of Sub-section (1), of Section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, by virtue of the delegation of powers to him under Section 44 (5) of the Act, and Rule 70 (1) (vi) of the M. P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1974, which reads:--

'70. Delegation of powers by Regional Transport Authority,-- (1) A R.T.A. may by general or special resolution recorded in its proceedings and subject to such restrictions, limitations and conditions as may be specified, delegate to the Secretary and/or Assistant Secretary of the Authority all or any of its following powers:-- (vi) the power to grant a temporary permit under Section 62 and under Sub-sections (4) and (6) of Section 63 of the Act,'

The R.T.A, in each of these cases, has, more or less, passed a resolution to the following effect:--

'In exercise of its powers vested in it under Section 44 (5) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, read with Rule 70 of the M. P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1974, R.T.A.. Sagar, delegate to its Secretary (R.T.O., Sagar), the following of its powers exercisable under the M. V. Act, 1939 and the M. P. M. V. Rules, 1974:-- VI. The power to grant a temporary permit under Section 62 and under Sub-section (4) of Section 63.'

3. The matter turns on the construction of Sub-section (1) of Section 62 of the Act, which reads:---

'62. Temporary permits.-- (1) A R.T.A. may, without following the pro-cedure laid down in Section 57, grant permits, to be effective for a limited period not in any case to exceed four months, to authorise the use of a transport vehicle temporarily-

(a) for the conveyance of passengers on special occasions such as to and from fairs and religious gatherings, or

(b) for the purposes of a seasonal business, or

(c) to meet a particular temporary need, or

(d) pending decision on an application for renewal of a permit; and may attach to any such permit any condition it thinks fit,'

4. It is urged by Shri Hasan, learned counsel for some of the petitioners and Shri B.K. Rawal and Shri P.C. Naik, learned counsel appearing for the other petitioners, that Sub-section (1) of Section 62 deals with two subjects, namely, (1) the grant of a temporary permit, and (2) imposition of conditions. It is urged by the learned counsel that though it is settled law that fixing of timings tantamounts to attaching a condition to the permit, the delegation of powers, under Rule 70 (1) (vi) of the M. P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1974, does not, in terms, give to the Secretary the power to fix timings, to., attaching any condition to the permit, although he has been delegated the power to grant a temporary permit under Sub-section (1) of Section 62 of the Act. We are afraid, we are unable to appreciate this line of argument at all.

5. It is common ground that the time-table attached to a permit, is a condition of the permit. If that be so, the Secretary, R.T.A. having been delegated the power to grant a permit under Sub-section (1) of S, 62 of the Act, such delegation of power necessarily carries with it the power to attach conditions to the permit. Shri Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioners, however, strenuously urges that the words 'and may attach to any such permit any condition it thinks fit' in Section 62 (1) of the Act, must be read distinct and separate from the opening word 'may', without following the procedure laid down in Section 57, grant permits, to be effective for a limited period not in any case to exceed four months, to authorise the use of a transport vehicle temporarily'. We are afraid, the section cannot be read disjunctively. The word 'and', occurring in the section, makes both the parts conjunctive.

6. There is a fallacy in the argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. The authority granting permits, must necessarily have the power to attach conditions to such permits.

Where a time-table is attached to a permit and it is further provided therein that the time-table must be adhered to without any deviation, the running of a stage carriage, according to the timetable, will be a condition of the permit. In New Jabalpur Transport (Pvt.) Ltd. v. State Transport Appellate Authority, M. P., AIR 1961 Madh Pra 367, it was held by a Division Bench of this Court that time-table constitutes a condition attached to a permit. The same view was followed by another Division Bench in Phoolchand v. Regional Transport Authority, Indore, M. P. No. 645 of 1975, D/- 12-11-1975 (Madh Pra). Though this was in the context as to whether a person aggrieved by the fixing of timings, is a person who can appeal under Section 64 of the Act, the underlying principle remains the same. There is some conflict of views between different High Courts as to whether the time-table itself is a condtion of a permit, but learned counsel for both the parties accept before us that it has been the consistent view of this Court that the tuner-table is a condition of the permit. That being so, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, by virtue of the delegation of; powers to grant temporary permits under Sub-section (1) of Section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, under the resolution passed by the R.T.A. read with Rule 70 (1) (vi) of the M, P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1974, and Section 44 (5) of the Act, necessarily has the power to attach one or more conditions to the permit, including the tunings attached to the permit, for the purpose of making the grant of such a permit effective.

7. The result, therefore, is that the writ petitions must fail and are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. The security amount shall be refunded to the petitioners.


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