M.C. Sunil vs Regional Transport Officer and Others

Kurian Joseph, J.—The appeals are at the instance of the same petitioner in both the writ petitions. The issue is whether the petitioner''s goods carriage vehicle, bearing No. KL-9/C 2968, which has been issued a national permit as per Ext. P1 in O.P. No. 12791 of 2001 is liable to pay authorisation fee and composite fee in respect of the years covered by the period of the national permit, in case the authorisation has actually not been issued.

The vehicle No. KL-9/C 2968 was issued national permit u/s 88(12) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 87 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and Rule 235 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The validity of the permit was from 22-11-1995 to 21-14-2000. The petitioner initially applied for authorisation in respect of ten States, as can be seen from Ext. P3, and the required authorisation fee was also paid. It is the case of the petitioner that though there was permit, owing to unavoidable circumstances, he could not operate the vehicle outside the home State, Kerala and hence he had not applied for authorisation except for the first year of permit referred to above as per Ext. P3. The Department also does not have a case that there was any authorisation issued to the vehicle other than Ext. P3 for one year. However, on the ground that the petitioner surrendered the national permit only in November, 2000, a presumption is drawn that the petitioner has actually plied the vehicle inter-State. In the States already indicated in Ext. P3 and hence authorisation fee and composite fee for the remaining four years were charged. The learned single Judge taking note of Ext. P6 representation produced in P. No. 10363 of 1998, wherein he had expressed his desire to surrender the national permit facility and the date of Ext.P6 being 9-3-1998 and taking the year of authorisation as ending on 21-11-1998, disposed of the writ petition justifying the levy of authorisation fee and composite fee up to 21-11-1998. Aggrieved, the writ appeals are filed.

Section 88(12) authorises the issuance of national permit by the State Transport Authority. "National permit" is defined at Explanation (c) to Section 88, which reads as follows :

(c) "national permit" Means a permit granted by the appropriate authority to goods carriages to operate throughout the territory of India or in such contiguous States, not being less than four in number Including the State in which the permit is issued as may be specified in such permit in accordance with the choice indicated in the application."

For the only reason that the vehicle possesses national permit, that does not entitle the vehicle to ply outside the State unless there is authorisation. The authorisation is issued by the State Transport Authority concerned. There is also a fee called "Authorisation fee". It is defined in Explanation (b) to Section 88, which reads as follows :

"(b) "authorisation fee" means the annual fee not exceeding one thousand rupees, which may be charged by the appropriate authority of a State to enable a motor vehicle, covered by the permit referred to in Sub-sections (9) and (12) to be used in other State subject to the payment of taxes or fees, if any, levied by the States concerned."

The fee is limited to Rs. 500/- as per Rule 87 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The authorisation is granted in Form No. 47 under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. Rule 87 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 reads as follows :

"87. Form, contents and duration of authorisation :--

(1) An application for the grant of an authorisation for a national permit shall be made in Form 46 and shall be accompanied by a fee of Rs. 500/- per annum in the form of a bank draft.

(2) Every authorisation shall be granted in Form 47 subject to the payment of the taxes or fees, if any, levied by the States concerned.

(2A) The authority which grants the authorisation shall inform the State Transport Authorities concerned the registration number of the Motor Vehicle, the name and address of the permit holder and the period for which the said authorisation is, valid.

(3) The period of validity of an authorisation shall not exceed one year at a time."

It is seen from Form 47 that the authorisation has to indicate the States where the vehicle is authorised to ply. National permit for goods carriage is issued under Rule 235 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and it is issued in Form N.P.Gd.C. It is seen from Rule 235 (7) that "the appropriate authority shall also forward to the State Transport Authorities of other States concerned, at intervals of not more than three months, a statement giving particulars of permit issued during the period and the taxes and fee, if any, due to the other States and collected." This provision is incorporated since it is the State which issues the authorisation that collects the authorisation fee and also the composite fee which is later forwarded to the State concerned.

A reading of the provisions as above would clearly indicate that merely because a vehicle possesses a national permit, that does not enable the vehicle to ply outside the State unless it is issued appropriate authorisation. It is seen from Ext. P1 national permit issued to the vehicle, produced in O.P. No. 12791 of 2001, at Column 4 that the names of States for which the national permit is applicable are not indicated, instead it is stated that "as per the authorisation issued so long as it is valid from time to time". This is certainly against the mandate in Section 88. The permit should specifically contain the States covered by the permit. This is because, authorisation can be issued only in respect of the States covered by the permit. But the permit holder is free to limit the authorisation in respect of any one or a few of the States and he need pay the fee and tax only in respect of that State. However, only on the strength of a national permit a vehicle cannot ply outside the State unless the authorisation is issued in respect of that State. Authorisation fee and the composite fee are paid for using the vehicle in the concerned State. In other words, National Permit alone does not make a vehicle eligible for use in other States. It naturally follows that in respect of the year or the States for which authorisation is not issued by the home State in respect of the vehicle, for the only reason that there was a national permit valid for a period of five years, the State is not entitled to collect authorisation fee and composite fee. The position is clear from Rule 87 (2A) of the Central Rules read with Rule 235 (7) of the Kerala Rules whereby the State is required to give periodic intimation of the authorisation already issued, to the States concerned. If the vehicle has been used outside the State without authorisation, it is for that State or the home State to take appropriate action for violating the Act and Rules and not for the home State to collect authorisation fee and composite fee for those States covered by the national permit.

We allow the Writ Appeals declaring that the liability of the writ petitioner to pay the authorisation fee and the composite fee in respect of the vehicle is only for the period covered by the authorisation already issued.