LexSARJOO PRASAD SINGH versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
...
A -
'
661
SARJOO PRASAD SINGH
v.
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
September 22, 1976
[A. N. RAY, C.J., M. H. BEG AND P. N. SHINGHAL, JJ.]
Nationalisation scheme of Bus Routes under s. 68C of the Motor
Vehicles
Act, 1939-Form A under.Rule 94A of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Rules read
with Schedule II serial No. 4·, 5 and 6-lnterpretation of-Whether it envisages
compulsory existence of private operators side by side with the State operation.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, Section 68D-Scope of-Whether there should be
a finding on each and every separate objection raised.
Monopoly of bus routes-Whether permitting the existing private operators
to operate till the date of expiry of their permits creates a monopoly.
Practice and procedure-Further plea taken in the affidavit-rejoinder to th~
writ petition shall not be allowed to be agitated.
·
Fifteen routes including the route Ranchi-DaHonganj via Knru was nationa-
lised by a scheme by the respondent State as per gazette notification dated
September 13, 1972. The scheme concerned inter a/.ia the area and the ronte
between Ranchi and Daltonganj including Ranchi, Kuru and Chandwa Dalton-
ganj, being a rural service. The scheme permitted the existing private operators
to continue till the expiry of their permits.
The appellants challenged the
scheme by way of an application under Art. 226 in the Patna High Court which
was disn1issed in lin1ine.
Dismissing the appeal by special leave the Court,
HELD : (I) Rule 94A speaks of particulars of scheme proposing modifica-
tion of an approved scheme prepare(\ by the Transport Corporation.
It is
wrong to read seriaL Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in schedule II in Form A which mentions
the number of State carriages, scheduled to operate in each route by private
operators and by State Transport Undertaking and the num:Jer of daily trips
scheduled in each route by both these operators, to suggest that e·<en though
" ·the route is nationalised, there must be private operators. The J\irm is general.
There may be on the same route both private operators and State Transport or
there may be only private operators or there may be only State Transport. The
form does not su.gllest tljat ~vrn \l1m;~h the route is nationalised, there must be
private operators, ·[{)62. f-=-=Q, 663 A~BJ
(2) Section 681) of the Motor Vehicles Act stat~s .that the State G<:>vernment
may, after co.nsidering the. objections and after g1.vmg an opportunity to the
objector or his represenl!'hves and the. representativ7s of the State Transport
Undertaking to be heard m the matter, 1f they so desire, approve or mod~fy .the
scheme. No. finding of fact is necessary on each and every separate ob1ect1011.
.
·
[663 D-E, G]
Capital Multi Purpose Co-operative Society Bhopal and othas v. State of
Madhya Pradesh [1967] 3 SCR 329, followed.
(3) No monopoly is conferred on the private operators who were allowed
to continue to operate.
Allowing them to operate .means they. were allowed
to continue to operate in accordance with the permits.
Operat10n
after the
expiry of the cm:rent permits would depend on the policy of the Government
whether there would be any renewal and if there would be any renewal, that
should be in accordance witfi Jaw. [663 H, 664 Al
( 4) Fresh plea by way of an allegation in the affidavit rejoinder to the writ
petit,ion when· the State had no opportunity to deal with such allegation cannot.
be allowed to be agitated. [664B]
B .
c
D•
F
G
H
iB
c
D
E
F
G
H
662
SUP.REME COURT REPORTS
[1977] 1 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE Jurusn1cnoN : Civil Appeal No. 742 of 1974.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated
15.2.1974 of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 215/74.
A. B. N. Sinha, K. K. Sinha, K. N. Deshav, S. K. Sinha and Ugra
Sankar Prasad for the appellant.
Pramod Swarup, for respondent No. 1
L. N. Sinhg, Sol. Genl., B. P. Singh and A. K. Srivastava,
for
D. Goburdhan, for respondent N_o. 2.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered l;>y .
RAY C. J.-This appeal by special leave is from the
judgment
dated 15 February 1974 of the Patna High Court.
The High Court
dismissed in limine !he application of the appellant under Article 226
of the Constitution.
The appellant challenged the scheme framed under section
68C
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 published in the Bihar Gazette on
13 September 1972.
The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation
published a scheme for nationalisation of fifteen routExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.