Abdul Rehman and ors. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors. - Court Judgment
|Court||Supreme Court of India|
|Case Number||Civil Appeal No. 1276 of 1975 and and SLP (Civil) No. 1852 of 1976|
|Judge|| Jaswant Singh and; V.R. Krishna Iyer, JJ.|
|Reported in||AIR1978SC949; (1978)2SCC674; 3SCR453; 1978(10)LC271(SC)|
|Acts||Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 - Sections 47, 47(3), 48 and 64; Constitution of India - Articles 136 and 226|
|Appellant||Abdul Rehman and ors.;rahimuddin|
|Respondent||State Transport Appellate Tribunal and ors.;regional Transport Authority and ors.|
|Appellant Advocate|| S.C. Agarwala,;Ad|
|Respondent Advocate|| A.K. Sen, ; J.P. Goyal and ; Ranhir Jain, Advs.|
|Prior history||From the Judgment and Order, dated August 27, 1975 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal 208 of 1975 and From the Judgment and Order dated September 3, 1975 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal 216 of 1973--|
.....under the income-tax act. but the income-tax officer, the appellate assistant commissioner and the appellate tribunal are all. creatures of that act and whether the provisions of the act are good or bad is not their concern. as the tribunal is a creature of the statute it can only decide the dispute between the assessee and the commissioner in terms of the: provisions 'of the act and the question of ultra vires is foreign to the scope of its jurisdiction. if an assessee raises such a question, the tribunal can only reject it on the ground that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the objection or decide on it. as no such question can be raised or can arise on the tribunal's order, the high court cannot possibly give any decision on the question of ultra vires, because its jurisdiction..........while dismissing the writ petition in part, he maintained the order dated may 5, 1973 of the state transport appellate tribunal in so far as it allowed the appeal no. 237 of 1969 preferred by harish chandra mishra against the order of the regional transport authority, meerut passed in its meeting held on august 28 and 29, 1964 and directed that a regular stage carriage permit for the amalgamated route known as meerut-mawana-hastinapur-bijnor and allied routes, be allowed to him.8. the facts giving rise to this petition are set out in our judgment of even dated in civil appeal no. 1276 of 1975 and need not be reiterated. in view of the settled position of law that this court would be reluctant to interfere with or disturb the decision of specially constituted authorities or.....
S.L.P. (Civil) No. 1852/75 :
Jaswant Singh, J.
7. This is a petition under Article 136 of the Constitution seeking special leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated September 3, 1975 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Special Appeal No. 216 of 1973 upholding the judgment and order dated August 28, 1973 of K. N. Singh, J. in writ petition No. 3310 of 1973 whereby while dismissing the writ petition in part, he maintained the order dated May 5, 1973 of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in so far as it allowed the appeal No. 237 of 1969 preferred by Harish Chandra Mishra against the order of the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut passed in its meeting held on August 28 and 29, 1964 and directed that a regular stage carriage permit for the amalgamated route known as Meerut-Mawana-Hastinapur-Bijnor and allied routes, be allowed to him.
8. The facts giving rise to this petition are set out in our judgment of even dated in Civil Appeal No. 1276 of 1975 and need not be reiterated. In view of the settled position of law that this Court would be reluctant to interfere with or disturb the decision of specially constituted authorities or tribunals under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 especially when the Legislature has entrusted the task of granting or renewing the stage carriage permits to the aforesaid authorities or tribunals which are expected to be fully conversant with the procedure and practice and the relevant matters which should engage their attention under the provisions contained in the Act and nothing basically wrong with the order sought to be appealed against so far as Harish Chandra Mishra is concerned has been found by the High Court, as also the observations made by this Court in Mohd. Ibrahim etc. v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Madras etc. : 1SCR474 we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed but without any order as to costs.