- (1.) THESE writ petitions have been filed for declaring clause (ii) of sub-rule (1) and also sub-rule (6) of Rule 5. 5 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990 (hereinafter to be called the Rules) as ultra vires, for quashing stage carriage permits granted in favour of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (In short RSRTC) issued in pursuance of the resolutions of the Regional Transport Authority (In short RTA) and for restraining the Secretary, RTA from granting and/or restraining the Secretary, RTA from granting and/or issuing any stage carriage permit temporary or non-temporary on the impugned routes in pursuance of the resolutions. The particulars of the RTA, resolutions and routes are as under :- S. No. Writ petition No. Name of RTA Date of Resolution Route 1. 4902/93 Jodhpur 21. 7. 93 Jalore-Sindri 2. 3435/93 Bikaner 22. 4. 93 Raisinghnagar to Deravyas via Padampur,ganganagar, Abhore, Mallot, Muktsar, Kotakpura, Mogha, Dharamkot & Juilandhar, 3. 4074/93 Bikaner 22. 4. 93 Anoopgarh to Bhatinda extended upto Patiala via Barnala & Sangrur. 4. 4903/93 Jodhpur 21. 4. 93 Jalore-Sindri 5. 4074/93 Bikaner 22. 4. 93 Raisinghnagar to Amritsar via Padampur, Fazilka, Ferozpur & Harikapttan. 6. 4079/93 Bikaner 22. 4. 93 Karanpur to Chintpurni via Ganganagar, Abhore, Mallot, Muktsar, Kotakpura, Mogha, Juilandhar & Hosiarpur
(2.) THESE writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order as their facts are similar and law involved is same. The petitioner's case is as follows. The petitioners hold stage carriage permits for their buses for their respective routes, noted above. The Regional Transport Authorities have already granted several permits on the said routes and have fixed time table for running of their buses. On the applications in the prescribed Form RS 5. 2 of the RSRTC for the grant of permits on the aforesaid new routes, resolutions were passed and permits were granted to RSRTC. New routes overlap substantial portions of the petitioner's routes resulting in great prejudice to them and adversely affecting their rights. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (In short New Act) has come into force with effect from July 1, 1989. Its section 217 provides for repeal and savings. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (In short old Act) has been repealed. Section 70 of the New Act provides for applications for stage carriage permits and Section 85 deals with the contents of permits. New Act does not provide for applications for permits in respect of service of stage carriage. Rule 5. 5 of the Rules deals with applications for grant of permits in respect of transport vehicles. Its clause (ii) prescribes Form, RS 5. 2 for an application in respect of service of stage carriage. Rule 5. 9 of the Rules provides for issue of permits and their forms. The forms of permits prescribed under Rule 5. 9 (1) (i) and (ii) of the Rules are quite different and distinct in material respects than the forms of permit which were earlier prescribed under the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rules 1951 (old Rules) Rule 5. 5 (1) (ii) of the Rules is void and discriminatory as no provision has been made in the New Act for making an application for the grant of service of stage carriage. Rule 5. 5 (1) (ii) of the Rules travel beyond the scope of the New Act. It does not carry into effect any provision of Chapter V of the New Act. The applications submitted by the RSRTC in Form 5. 2 are, therefore, invalid and ineffective and not maintainable. The jurisdiction of the RTA could be invoked only on making of an application for a stage carriage permit strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 70 of the New Act and not otherwise. As such the RTA completely lacked jurisdiction for issuing permits for the service of stage carriage. Section 70 of the New Act is complete Code in itself so far as filing of an application is concerned. Old Act provided for application and permit in the prescribed forms. No such provision exists in the New Act for prescribing forms of application and permit. As such resolutions for issuing permits to the RSRTC and permits so issued deserve to be quashed. In reply, the RSRTC admits that permits were issued to it in respect of the aforesaid routes. It has further been averred that there was no provision regarding amalgamated route in the old Act and also in the New Act, petitioners are not aggrieved persons, it is not correct that there is no provision in Sections 70, 72 and 85 of the New Act regarding form, application and permit, challenge to the New Rules is wholly incorrect and totally mis-conceived, permits have rightly and validly been issued, resolutions passed by the RTAs are quite valid and legal, provisions of Section 70 of the New Act are quite wide, New Rules do not travel beyond the scope of the New Act, they are quite valid and legal, the applications made by the RSRTC for the stage carriage permits did not suffer from any illegality and infirmity and the RSRTC was fully entitled for the stage carriage permits on the impugned routes. Section 70 (1) of the New Act runs as under :- "70. Application for stage carriage permit (1) An application for a permit in respect of a stage carriage (in this Chapter referred to as a stage carriage permit) or as a reserve stage carriage shall as far as may be, contain the following particular, namely :-" Corresponding to Section 70 of the New Act is Section 46 of the old Act. It runs as under : - "46. Application for stage carriage permit.- An application for a permit in respect of a service of stage carriages or to use a particular motor vehicle as a stage carriage (in this Chapter referred to as a stage carriage permit) shall, as far as may be, contain the following particulars, namely: - "
(3.) COMPARATIVE study of the above quoted provisions relating to the application for stage carriage permit shows that Section 46 of the Old Act speaks in respect of a service of stage carriage or to use a particular motor vehicle as a stage carriage and Section 70 of the New Act speaks permit in respect of a stage carriage or as a reserve stage carriage. On the basis of this difference in phraseology it was contended that Section 70 of the New Act does not deal with permit in respect of a service of stage carriage. Prima facie, this argument seems to be attractive but it is not so. Section 2 (4) of the New Act defines 'stage carriage' almost similarly as was defined in Section 2 (29) of the Old Act. As a matter of fact the words 'service of appearing before 'in respect of a' and after 'stage carriages' were redundant. According to the definition of 'stage carriage' as given in Section 2 (29) of the Old Act and Section 2 (40) of the New Act, means a motor vehicle to carry passengers for hire or reward for the whole journey or for stages of the journey. This definition contemplates service. Clauses (a) to (f) of both the above quoted sections (Section 46 of the Old Act and Section 70 of the New Act) are almost similar. Section 70 (1) of the New Act also contemplates applications for permit in respect of a service of stage carriage. The phrase 'permit in respect of means permit in respect of a single stage carriage and also permit in respect of several stage carriage. Section 13 (2), General Clauses Act provides that unless there is any thing contained repugnant to the Act or Rules, words in the singular shall include plural and vice-versa. Thus the word 'permit' in respect of a stage carriage also includes permit in respect of service of stage carriages. As such Rules 5. 5 (1) (ii) and 5. 5 (6) and Form RS-5 are quite valid. They have been framed under Section 96 of the New Act for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of Chapter V of the New Act. They do not travel beyond the scope of the Act. The Forms 5. 1 and 5. 2 contain the particulars which are enumerated in clauses (a) to (f) of Section 70 of the New Act. Similarly, Form, 5. 10 relating to the permit in respect of service of stage carriages is also consistent with the provisions of Section 70 of the New Act. Accordingly, provisions of Rule 5. 5 (1) (ii), 5. 5 (6) and 5. 9 (ii) of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990 are quite valid and are intra vires of, the provisions of Section 70 of the New Act. The next question for consideration is whether the aforesaid resolutions of the RTAs granting permits for services of stage carriages on the aforesaid routes and grant of permits in pursuance thereof to RSRTC are against the provisions of law. Relevant portion of Section 80 of the New Act runs as under: - "80. Procedure in applying for and granting permits. (1) An application for a permit of any kind may be made at any time. (2) A Regional Transport Authority shall not ordinarily refuse to grant an application for. permit of any kind made at any time under this Act. " It has been observed in Mithilesh Garg v. Union of India (1), as follows "a comparative reading of the provisions of the Act and the old Act (1939) makes it clear that the procedure for grant of. permits under the new Act has been liberalized to such an extent that an intended operator can get a permit for asking irrespective of the number of operators already in the field. The scheme envisaged under Sections 47 and 57 of the old Act has been completely done away with by the Act. The right of existing operators to file objections and the provision to impose limit on the number of permits have been taken away. There is no similar provision of that of S. 47 and S. 57 under the new Act. The statement of objects and reasons of the Act shows that the purpose of bringing in the Act was to liberalise the grant of permits. " ;