LexM/S S.R.S. TRAVELS BY ITS PROPRIETOR K.T. RAJASHEKAR versus THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION WORKERS & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 262 : 2025 INSC 152 M/s S.R.S. Travels by its Proprietor K.T. Rajashekar v. The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Workers & Ors. (Civil Appeal No(s). 2181-2182 of 2025) 06 February 2025 [Vikram Nath* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2003 repealing the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976 particularly given that the 1976 Act had earlier been upheld by this Court; and whether u/s.68(5) of the Motor Vehicles Act read with r. 56 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, the state and regional transport authorities can lawfully delegate the power to grant contract carriage permits to the Secretary or whether such power must remain with the multi-member authorities due to its quasi-judicial character. Headnotes† Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act, 2003 – s.3 – Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976 – Validity of repealing Act – Power of the legislature to repeal an Act – Presidential assent for repeal statute, if required – KCCA Act designed to bring privately operated contract carriages under State control in order to serve the public interest and to implement the Directive Principles of State Policy – However, over the ensuing decades, urbanization intensified, public transport demand grew, and it became increasingly evident that the restrictive regime established by the KCCA Act was contributing to an artificial scarcity of public transport services, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas – In response, the Legislature exercised its plenary power by enacting the 2003 Act which repealed the KCCA Act – Constitutional validity of repealing Act: * Author [2025] 3 S.C.R. 263 M/s S.R.S. Travels by its Proprietor K.T. Rajashekar v. The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Workers & Ors. Held: s.3 of the 2003 Act which repeals the KCCA Act, is constitutional, and State Legislature rightly exercised its power to repeal the Act – Power to repeal a law is coextensive with the power to enact it – Repeal was not an arbitrary act of legislative whim but was backed by a clear statement of objects and reasons that identified the deficiencies in the existing regulatory framework and the necessity to liberalize the transport sector – This Court’s decisions affirming the constitutional validity of an Act, do not bind the Legislature from modifying or repealing a statute when subsequent developments warrant a change in policy – It cannot be said that repeal should have required fresh presidential assent – Repeal statute does not recreate the legal framework anew but rather extinguishes the earlier Act’s operative provisions – Repeal statute is not subject to the same procedural requirements as an original enactment when it comes to the need for fresh assent, provided that the repeal falls within the legislative competence of the State – 2003 Repeal Act is rooted in the practical realities of modern transport policy – Repeal of the KCCA Act was thus a deliberate policy decision aimed at fostering a more dynamic and responsive transport framework – Legislature may, subject to constitutional limitations, repeal any law it has enacted – Repeal does not alter or contradict the judicial interpretation of the 1976 Act; rather, it reflects a conscious legislative choice to adapt to new economic and social conditions – Rationale underlying the 2003 Repeal Act is sound and consistent with the principles of legislative power. [Paras 10, 11, 13-18] Motor Vehicles Act 1988 – ss.68(3)(b), 96 – Karnataka Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 – rr.55, 56 – Delegation of power to grant permit – Under s.68(5) of the MV Act, rw r.56 of the 1989 Rules, State Transport Authority-STA and Regional Transport Authorities-RTA, if can lawfully delegate the power to grant contract carriage permits to the Secretary or such power to remain with the multi-member authorities due to its quasi- judicial character: Held: State Transport Authority possesses the power to delegate its functions u/s.68(5) of the MV Act read with r.56(1)(d) of the KMV Rules – Secretary of the STA is empowered to grant non- 264 [2025] 3 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports stage carriage permits (including contract carriage, special, tourist, and temporary permits) in accordance with s.68(5
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.