LexBUNDELKHAND MOTOR TRANSPORT COMPANY, NOWGAON versus BEHARI LAL CHAURASIA AND ANOTHER
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
~ ---~ '! ·• -~ • :t; 4 4115 • A M/S. BUNDELKHAND MOTOR TRANSPORT COMPANY, NOWGAON B c D v. BEHARI LAL CHAURASIA AND ANOTHER August 17, 1965 [P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J., K. N. WANCHOO, M. HIDAYATULLAH, J. C. SHAH AND S. M. S!KRI, JJ.] Motor Vehicles Act (4 of 1939), s. 63 and Central Provinces and Berar Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940, r. 63 made under s. 68-Scope of. The appellant had a permit under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, to ply stage carriages on an inter-regional route. The permit was granted by the< Regional Transport Authority, Jabalpur, and was countersigned by the Regional Transport Authority of the Rewa region. The appella~t applied to the R.T.A., Jabalpur, for renewal of the permit and the permit was renewed. The appellant also applied for countersignature of the renewal, to the same authority, under rule 63, framed under s. 68 of the Act, for plying in the Rewa region; but the application was rejected. The appellant then applied to the R.T.A. Rewa, to countersign the renewd permit, and that authority granted countersignature of the permit overrul- ing the objections of the first respondent. The first respondent therefon1 moved the High Court and the High Court quashed the order of the R.T.A., Rewa. In the appeal to this Court, HELD : The Legislature has, by providing in the opening part of s. 63(1) of the Act, "Except as may otherwise be prescribed", made the provision subject to the rules framed under s. 68, and a rule conferring authority to countersign the permit in so far as it relates to another region, upon the R.T.A. who issues the permit is made, in r. 63(a). The power to frame the rules is expressly granted by s. 68, and the exercise of that power for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of the Act, is not subject to any other implied limitations. Therefore r. 63 must prevail over s. 63. [491 C-E] F When the R.T.A .. Jabalpur, ren·ewed the permit for the Jabalpur G H region, but declined to countersign the permit, in exercise of the power conferred by r. 63 in respect of the route in the Rewa region, the con- clusion is inevitable that the Authority granted the permit operative only in the Jabalpur region. The permit being only a regional permit, there was no p:ut of the route for which the R.T.A., Rewa, could, by counter- signing the permit, extend it so as to make it operative, in the Rewa region. In any event, as one R.T.A. is not compe,tent to sit in judgment over the discretion exercised by another R.T.A., upon whom the power is conferred in regard to a particular matte.r under the statute, the order of the R.T.A., Rewa, granting countersignature in the teeth of the earlier order of the R.T.A., Jabalpur, was invalid. But, that did not affect the validity of the permit granted by the R.T.A., Jabalpur, for the Jabalpur region. [491 F; 492 D-GJ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 51 of 65 . Appeal from the judgment and order dated November 11, 1964 of the Madhya Pradesh High Gourt in Misc. Petition No. 238 of 1964. .. 486 SUPll.EMI! COURT ll.EPOllTS (1966] I S.C.R. G. S. Pathak and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for the appellant B. R. L. Iyengar, Manmohan Krishnan Kaul, S. K. Mehta and K. L. Mehta, for the respondent No. I. S. V. Gupu, Solicitor-General and /. N. Shroff, for the inter- vener. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A Sbab, J. In 1957 the Regional Transport Authority, Jabalpur granted to Messrs. Bundelkhand Motor Transport Company, Nowgaon-hereinaftcr called 'the appellant'-a permit under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 to ply stage carriages on an inter- c regional routo--Jabalpur to Chhatarpur-in the State of Madhya Pradesh, and the permit was countersigned by the Regional Transport Authority, Rewa within whose jurisdiction a part of the route lay. The permit was renewed in 1960 for a period of three D ' years expiring on August 9, 1963 by the Regional Transport Authority, Jabalpur, and it was countersigned by the Regional Transport Authority, Rewa. On June 7, I 963 the appellant applied to the Regional Transport Authority, Jabalpur for re- newal of the permit, and by order dated December 6, · 1963 the i permit was renewed for the period ending February 9, 1966. D:: t. its application dated December 7, 1963 the appellant requested . L the Regional Transport Authority, R.ewa to countersign the E ~ permit so renewed. This application wa> published as required b
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.