RAMESHWAR PRASAD ETC., ETC. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & OTHERS

Citation: [1983] 2 S.C.R. 418 · Decided: 24-02-1983 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.P. SEN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
G 
H 
418 
RAMESHWAR PRASAD ETC., ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & OTHERS 
February 24! 1983 
[A.P. SEN AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.J 
Motor Vehi~s Act, 1939 as in force in the State of Uttar Pradesh-S. 43 .. A 
as amended by U.P. Act 15 of 1976 read withs. 47 as amended by Cent;a/ Act 47 
of 1978-lnterpretation of-Stdte Government cannot 
issue directions under 
sub-s. (1) of s. 43-A for grant of stage carriage permits to all eligible applicants 
after amendment of s. 43-A by U. P. Acl 15of1976-Whi/e isJuing directions under 
su!J..s. (1) of s. 43-A State Government cannot r"gnore provisions contained in sub-
ss. (1) and {IA) to (1H) of s. 47. 
Interpretation-Rule of construction of an amnided provision. 
Words and Phrases-' Public interest'-What It means in the context of 
Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. 
A 'stage carriage' under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 means a motor 
vehicle which carries more than six persons for hire or reward at separate fares 
paid by or for individual passengers either for the whole journey or for stages of 
the journey and for plying such a vehicle it is necessary to obtain a permit 
from the appropriate Transport Authority. While considering an application 
for such a permit, the Transport Authority must, under els. (a) to (f) of sub-s. (1) 
of s. 47, have regard to the interest of the public generally, the advantages to 
the public of the service to be provided, the adequacy of other passenger trans-
port services operating between the places to be served, the operation by the 
applicant of other transport services, ,etC., and also take into consideration the 
representations made by local or police authorities and by persons already 
providing passenger transport facilities by any means along or near the proposed 
route or area. The State Government may, under sub-s. (1) of s. 43, having 
regard to the advantages offered to the public by the development of motor 
transport, the desirability of preventing uneconomic competition among motor 
vehicles, etc., issue appropriate directions to the Transport Authority. 
The subject matter of regulation of motor vehicles being within the scope 
of entry 35 of the Concurrent List, the Act in its application to the State of 
Uttar 
Pradesh was 
amended 
in 1972 by the U .P. Legislature by the. 
introduction of s. 43-A which was a new provision. While sub-s. (1) thereof 
conferred power on the State Government to issue .directions of a general charac-
ter in public interest in respect of any matter relating to road transport, sub-s. 
-
' 
) 
...._ __ ~ 
RAMESHWAR PD. V, U.P. STATE 
419 
(2) specifically conferred the power to issue directions regarding grant of stage 
carriage permits to all eligible applicants if the State Government was of the 
opinion that it was in the public interest to do so. Further, under sub·s. (2) of 
s. 43·A, the provisions of s. 47 stood amended to the effect that while considedng 
an api)Jication for permit, it was no longer necessary for the Transport Authority 
to have regard to the adequacy of other passenger transport services operating 
between the places to be served or to the operation by the applicant of other 
-transport 
services; nor was the Transport Authority required to look into 
representations made by any one other than local or police authorities. The 
State Government, acting under s. 43-A, ·issued directions in March, 1972 for 
grant of permits to a11 eligible applicants without any restriction as to the 
number of permits to be issui:d on any route. The validity of s. 43-A and the 
directions issued 
tbereunder 
were upheld by the Court in HanJ Raj Kehar & 
Ors v. State of UP. & Ors. (1975) I S.C.R. 916. But, within a short time, the 
State Government realised the necessity of reviewing the policy of issuing permits 
to all eligible applicants and amended s. 43-A with retrospective effect by the 
Uttar Pradesh Act 15 of 1976. While subs. (!)was retained as such, sub-s. (2) 
was substituted by an entirely new sub-section. The Statement of Objects and 
Reasons appended to the Amending Act stated that it had become necessary to 
reconsider the policy of granting bus permits liberally with a view to checking 
unproductive capital expenditure and unnecessary consu.mption of fuel, preven-
ting elimination of sman operators as a consequence of unreasonable competi-
tion, efc. and authorising the State Government to issue necessary directions 
from time to time in regard to the number of permi

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