Gangappa, M.P. and Another vs Secretary, K.S.T.A. and Another

M.P. Chandrakantharaj Urs, J.-The petitioners are stage carriage operators on the routes between Bangalore to Dharmavaram via. Doddaballapur, Gowribidanur, Hindupur, Penukonda; and between Bangalore to Hindupur via Doddaballapur; and on the route between Bangalore and Kalahasti via. Hoskote, Kolar, Mulbagal, Chittor and Tirupathi, which are inter-state routes. They are affected by the counter-signature granted by the Karnataka State Transport Authority to the temporary permit issued by the Secretary, Andhra State Transport Authority on the routes Tadipatri to Bangalore via Ananthapur, Penugonda, Hindupur, Gowribidanur and Doddaballapur; Bangalore to Hindupur via Doddaballapur and Bangalore to Kalahasti via Hoskote, Kolar, Mulbagal, Chitoor and Tirupathi for the obvious reason that the whole of the route lying in the State of Karnataka is operated by the petitioners on their pucca permits. The ground made out by the petitioners is that whatever may be the reason for the State Transport Authority, Andhra Pradesh to entertain the petition which did not disclose the nature of the temporary need, the State Transport Authority, Karnataka was wholly in error in granting countersignature on the ground that the route in question finds a place in the interstate agreement as notified in the notification No. FTD/98/TMI/84 dated 31-3-1986. That notification is a notification issued by the State of Karnataka under Section 16 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, exempting the operators on the route of either States from paying the tax payable to the State. That is not a ground on which counter-signature may be granted by the 1st respondent, the State Transport Authority, Karnataka. Counter-signature is a must for every inter-regional or inter-state permit in order to validate the permit for the portion of the route which lies outside the jurisdiction of the authority which granted the original permit. It can be dispensed with only in the manner provided for under sub-section (3A) of Section 63 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Unless there is an interstate agreement contemplated under Section 63(3A) of the said Act, countersignature cannot be granted as a matter of course. The fact that the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act exempts the operators from the payment of tax in the State in respect of vehicles operating on the routes appended to that notification is not to be construed as an inter-state agreement under sub-section (3A) of Sec. 63 of the Act. In the instant case countersignature has been made by the 1st respondent without the application of mind. In that view of the matter, the impugned resolution granting counter-signature is liable to be quashed and it is so quashed in so tar as it relates to Sl. Nos. 1 and 3 in Annexure-F in W.P. 9705 to 9707/86. The State Transport Appellate Authority, Karnataka, is free to apply its mind to the temporary need that may exist and proceed to grant the countersignature in accordance with the procedure laid down under Section 63 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Rule is made absolute. No costs.

Sri P.R. Ramesh, learned H.C.G.P. is permitted to file his memo of appearance within 2 weeks.