BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION versus STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ORS.

Citation: [1991] 1 S.C.R. 667 · Decided: 22-02-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.M. PUNCHHI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

BIHAR STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION 
v. 
~-:--· STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 22, 1991 
[MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI AND K. RAMASWAMY JJ.] 
Motor Vehicles Act, 1939: Stage Carriage permits-Grant of-
~ ~Private. Operators-:Bh~rkunda-Chaibasa route-1:~rt of route Ranchi 
' 
.:._Chaibasa a nationalised route covered by notified Scheme under 
section 68-D(3)-0bjections by State Road Transport Corporation 
rejected and permits granted to two private operators. 
A 
B 
c 
Section 2(28-A)-Definition of word 'route'-Notified Scheme 
dated 1.4.1960 covering 7 routes including Ranchi-Chaibasa route-
·--y Bracketed word 'direct service' used only in Serial No. 7 showing 
· Ranchi-Chaibasa route-Interpretation of words 'direct service'- D 
Whether the view taken by High Court in Marwari Motor Service's case 
is any more relevant in view of the decision of this Court in Adarsh 
Travels' case. 
The State Transport Authority, Ribar invited applications for 
grant of Stage Carriage permits for the route named, Bhurkhunda-
E 
>--. Chaibasa via Patratu-Pithoria-Kanke-Ranchi-Chakradharpur part of 
which, that is, Ranchi Chaibasa is covered under a notified Scheme 
dated 1.4.1960, duly in force, under the Act. The Ribar State Road 
Transport Corporation, a State Undertaking, filed its objections claim-
ing that no private operator could be permitted to operate the said route 
as part of the route being Ranchi-Chaibasa was itself a notified route F 
and grant of permits on the route in question would contravene the 
notified Scheme. Taking the view that the over-lapping Ranchi-
~ 
Cbaibasa route was restrictedly notified for direct services only, the 
objections raised by the Corporation were rejected and permits for the 
route in question granted to respondents 3 and 4. Corporation's appeal 
to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and thereafter Writ Perition G 
before the Patna High Court being unsuccessful, it has come in appeal 
by special leave against the judgment of the High Court dismissirlg the 
-'-
Writ Petition in limine. Allowing the appeal and quashing all the three 
'?'<. orders, this Court. 
HELD: In the light of the observations made in Constitution H 
667 
668 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1991] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
Bench decision of this Court in Adarsh Travels' case def"ming the wo~ 
'route', the Ranchi-Chaibasa route is identified as the line of travel on 
B 
c 
which State Undertaking on nationalisation is allowed to run its vehi-
cles. The bracketed words 'direct service' occuring in serial no. 7 when 
contrasted with entries in serial nos. 1 to 6 reveal that the total route of 
Ranchi-Chaibasa, without leaving any portion, stood nationalised 
signifying by its name that Ranchi-Chaibasa route is a straight and 
direct line of travel which would be traversed by a vehicle by the State ~ 
Transport Undertaking between two termini rendering all kinds or 
services. Any further interpretation would frustrate the object of Chap-
ter IV-A whereunder the scheme is prepared. [672G-673B] 
If the interpretation put by the Patna High Court in Marwari 
Motor Service's case to the bracketed words 'direct service' is to be 
kept valid, it would frustrate the very purpose of nationalisation, for 
any person in that event could operate on a nationalised route by adding ''y--"'-
thereto, or substracting therefrom, some kilometerage and keep one 
i 
terminus as a point of start, or a point of ending, on an on-notified route 
D 
and put forward his ~ 
to submit himself to the discipline called 'cor-
ridor restictions' which practice has been deprecated by um Court. (673E-F] 
Mis Marwari Motor Service v. Chotanagpur Regional Transport 
Authority and Others, AIR 1973 Patna (Vol. 60) 273, referred to. 
E 
Adarsh Travels Bus Service & Another v. ~tate of U.P. &Others, 
[1985) (Suppl.) 3 SCR 661, followed. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3693 
of 1982. 
F 
~rom the Judgment and Order dated 29.1.1982 of the Patna High ~ 
Court m C.W.J.C. No. 4087of1981. 
· 
G 
Ranjit Kumar for the Appellant. 
Ex-Parti for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
· PUNC.HHI, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against 
the order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 29-1-1982 
passed in Civil Writ Number 4087 of 1981 dismissing the Writ Petition 
of the appellant in limine. 
H 
The appellant, Bihar State road Transport Corporation, is a 
-
BIHARSTATETRANSPORTCORP. v. TRANSPORTTRIBUNAL[PUNCHHI,J.]669 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.