Satish Chandra, J. - (1.) This group of special appeals raises common questions. They arise out of orders passed by the State Transport Authority, approving the re -classification of certain routes by the respective Regional Transport Authorities. As a result of the re -classification, the tax payable by the Appellants under the U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1935, was increased. Feeling aggrieved, they challenged the action on a variety of grounds. A learned Single Judge of this Court did not accept any of the grounds. Hence, these appeals.
(2.) Mr. Naithani, appearing for the Appellants, urged that the power vested in the Regional Transport Authority, of re -classifying routes was quasi -judicial in nature. It was incumbent upon the authority to comply with the principles of natural justice and afford an opportunity of hearing to the persons operating vehicles on the concerned routes, before re -classifying them. Mr. Sharma, appearing in Sp. A. No. 284 of 1963 (Kishan Lal's appeal), raised an additional point that Rule 6 of the Rules framed under the Act was ultra vires the rule -making powers.
(3.) Sec. 4 of the Act provides for imposition of tax on the motor vehicles using public places, in accordance with the appropriate rate specified in the 1st Schedule to the Act. A reference to the Schedule shows that various rates are prescribed, depending upon the classification of the routes, as special or ordinary. The ordinary routes have to be classified further as an A class route, or a B class route, or a C class route. The special class routes bear the highest rate of tax, while the C class routes have a lower rate of tax. Sub -section (2) of Sec. 4 provides that the Prescribed Authority shall classify the routes. Sec. 21 confers upon the State Govt. rule -making power. Rule 5 of the Rules so framed provides: 5. Classification of routes - -The State Transport Authority and every Regional Transport Authority shall with the approval of the State Transport Authority in the case of a Regional Transport Authority classify all routes within the jurisdiction of each Authority as Special Routes or as A class, B class or C class routes. Thus, it is primarily the State Transport Authority, which is a highest authority constituted by the Motor Vehicles Act aid which has jurisdiction over the entire state, that has been prescribed as the authority to do the classification. Every Regional Transport Authority also can make the classification, but then it has to seek the approval of the State Transport Authority before its decision becomes affective. Rule 6 lays down the matters to be considered in classifying routes. It says: 6. Considerations to be applied when classifying routes: When so classifying routes, every controlling authority shall be guided by the following considerations in the order in which they appear in this rule, that is to say - - (a) the potential income, which in regard to all the circumstances of the route, it may be expected, will accrue from the employment of a public service vehicle on that route. (b) the cost of maintenance of the road or roads or the portion or portions of any road or roads comprised within the said route. (c) The necessity for the development of the proposed route in the public interest. Section 5 of the Act provides for payment of tax. Sec. 15 confers a right of appeal to any person aggrieved by an order relating to the assessment, imposition or recovery of tax. There is no provision for inviting objections or representations from the operators, while classifying routes. But, when it comes to the actual assessment or recovery of tax, the operators have been given a right to prefer an appeal, if they feel aggrieved. While classifying routes, the Prescribed Authority does not deal with any dispute between the operators. It has to arrive at its own decision objectively, having regard to matters mentioned in Rule 6, independently of any representation by the operators. The decision of the Prescribed Authority is in regard to its administrative policy. There is no his or dispute before it, the decision of which may affect one more adversely than the other operator. In this context, it can hardly be said that while classifying routes, the Prescribed Authority exercises judicial functions.;