Bachawat, J. - (1.) The respondent carries on the business of collecting forwarding and distributing goods carried by public carriers in Delhi. On October 27, 1956, the Chief Commissioner, Delhi issued a notification under S. 68 (2) (ww) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Under this notification, the respondent and other agents engaged in the business of collecting forwarding and distributing goods carried by public carriers are required to take out licences. The respondent filed a writ petition in the Punjab High Court challenging Cl. (ww) of S.68 (2) and the aforesaid notification on various grounds and asking for an order quashing the notification. A single Judge of the High Court struck down Cl. (ww) and allowed the writ petition. He held that the clause was ultra vires and invalid and therefore the notification issued under it was also invalid. His decision was affirmed on Letters Patent Appeal by a Division Bench of the High Court. The appellants have preferred the present appeal from this order after obtaining a certificate from the High Court.
(2.) Chapter IV of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 provides for control of transport vehicles. The chapter contains Sections 42 to 68. Section 68 (I) provides that a State Government may make rules for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of Chap. IV. Section 68 (2) provides that without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, rules under the section may be made with respect to all or any other matters enumerated in the various sub-clauses thereof Clause (ww) of S. 68 (2) provides that the State Government may make rules for "the licensing of agents engaged in the business of collecting, forwarding and distributing of goods carried by public carriers. " This clause was inserted in S. 68 (2) by Delhi Act, No. 5 of 1954 and also later by Central Act No. 100 of 1 956.
(3.) The High Court held that as the rules framed under S. 68 can be made only for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of Chap. IV, such rules must relate to a substantive provision of law in the chapter. As there was no substantive provision in Chap. IV requiring agents in the business of collecting, forwarding and distributing goods carried by public carriers to take out licences, the legislature had no power to enact Cl. (ww) of S. 68 (2) authorising the framing of rules for the licensing of such agents. The legislature must, in the first instance, make a law requiring such agents to take out licences. As the legislature did not make such a law, the clause is ultra vires its powers and is invalid.;