- (1.) Several writ applications had been filed in different High Courts by operators of stage carriages, mini buses, auto rickshaws and goods carriers. For convenient disposal, these cases were transferred to this Court under Art. 139A of the Constitution on petitions filed by parties and on transfer these have been registered as transferred cases.
(2.) Though there was a writ petition in the Calcutta High Court on behalf of the auto rickshaw owners and is numbered as Transfer Case No. 48 of 1990 in this Court, we find that there has been no escalation in the insurance tariff in regard to auto rickshaws. At the hearing no one has appeared to support the petition. We accordingly dismiss the petition as being without any cause of action. 2A. The remaining petitions can be divided into three categories; one by operators of passenger buses, the second by taxi operators and the last by goods vehicle operators. Challenge before us is three-fold : (1) the statutory Committee contemplated under the Insurance Act has not been properly constituted; (2) There has been no opportunity given to the affected parties to represent their stand and steps taken are not warranted; and (3) There is violation of Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
(3.) Mr. Baig appearing for the Tariff Advisory Committee has pointed out to us that the first point had not been raised in the writ petitions. The way counsel for the petitioners have placed their contention it appears to us that it is essentially on the construction of the statutory provisions and no reference to facts is warranted. We have, therefore, not considered it to be appropriate to take a technical view to reject the contention.;