Prasant Dobhal vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Alok Singh, J.—In all these writ petitions, identical question of law is involved, therefore, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, these petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. In all these writ petitions, the only question of law involved is - As to whether stage carriage permit under section 72 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 can be granted in favour of the three wheelers, Vikram Tempo, Tata Magic and Maximo?

Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that Transport Authorities have issued contract stage carriage permit to some three-wheelers, Vikram tempo, Tata Magic and Maximo; Vikram Jan Sewa Kalyan Samiti and others preferred Writ Petition (M/S) No. 126 of 2014 before this Court, which was disposed of by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 16.1.2014. Order dated 16.1.2014 reads as under:

"It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a registered society. The petitioner society has been formed to look after the welfare and interest of the owners of the vikram tempo. It is also contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that all the members of the petitioner''s society are charging the fare which is fixed by the authorities. It is also contended that petitioner moved representation in the year 2011 for converting the permit of its members from contract carriage to stage carriage but no decision has been taken in this regard. He further prays that direction be issued to the respondent authority (s) to decide the representation of the petitioner association in accordance with law.

Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, I dispose of the writ petition with direction to the competent authority to take necessary action on the representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order."

Order dated 16.1.2014 was challenged in Special Appeal No. 83 of 2014; Special Appeal No. 83 of 2014 was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment dated 26.6.2014. Order dated 26.6.2014 passed in Special Appeal No. 83 of 2014 reads as under:

"Present appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 16.1.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 126 of 2014, whereby learned Single Judge was pleased to dispose of the writ petition with the direction to competent authority to take necessary action on the representation of the petitioner seeking conversion of contract carriage permit to Stage carriage permit.

Mr. B.S. Adhikari, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, submits that appellant has every reasonable apprehension in mind that impugned order dated 16.1.2014 shall be misunderstood to mean as if this Court has directed the authority to convert the contract carriage permit to the Stage carriage permit.

Apprehension shown by Mr. B.S. Adhikari, learned Counsel for the appellant, is misconceived. It goes without saying that this Court has not issued any positive direction that in any case contract carriage permit has to be converted into State carriage permit. The only direction issued by this Court is that the Authority shall take decision on the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law.

With this observation, present appeal stands disposed of."

Thereafter, Regional Transport Authority issued Notification on 21.8.2014, thereby informing all concerned that in a meeting dated 30.8.2014 of the RTA, Agenda No. 7 to grant Stage Carriage Permit to light transport vehicles for Dehradun, Raipur-Maldevta city bus service route and Agenda No. 15 for formulation of route for the three-wheelers, Vikram Tempo shall be considered.

Petitioners, hence, preferred present writ petitions challenging Agenda Nos. 7 and 15 of the Notification dated 21.8.2014.

It is vehemently argued that in the garb of Agenda Nos. 7 and 15, Regional Transport Authority is contemplating to grant stage carriage permit to three-wheelers, Vikram Tempo, Tata Magic and Maximo. It is further contended that no such stage carriage permit can be granted in favour of three-wheelers - Vikram Tempo and Tata Magic either for the city bus route or for any other route; no route can be formulated for the three-wheelers Vikram Tempo, Tata Magic or Maximo.

On the other hand, Mr. A.K. Joshi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that since learned Single Judge of this Court, vide order dated 16.1.2014 passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 126 of 2014, was pleased to direct the Authorities to take decision on the representation of the Vikram Jan Kalyan Sewa Samiti to grant stage carriage permit in their favour, therefore, RTA has included Agenda Nos. 7 and 15 in the Notification dated 21.8.2014.

As per section 72 of the Act, stage carriage permit can be granted for the operation of the stage carriage for the specified area or on a specific route or routes subject to the conditions attached to the permit in accordance with the rules.

Sub-section (28) and sub-section (40) of section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as under:

"(28). "motor vehicle" or "vehicle" means any mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads whether the power of propulsion is transmitted thereto from an external or internal source and includes a chassis to which a body has not been attached and a trailer; but does not include a vehicle running upon fixed rails or a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises or a vehicle having less than four wheels fitted with engine capacity of not exceeding [twenty-five cubic centimetres];"

"(40). "stage carriage" means a motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than six passengers excluding the driver for hire or reward at separate fares paid by or for individual passengers, either for the whole journey or for stages of the journey;"

As per sub-section (28) of section 2, a vehicle running upon fixed rails or a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises or a vehicle having less than four wheels fitted with engine capacity of not exceeding twenty-five cubic centimetres does not fall within the definition of "motor vehicle."

As per sub-section (40) of section 2, only such motor vehicles, which carry more than six passengers excluding the driver for hire or reward at separate fares paid by or for individual passengers, either for the whole journey or for stages of the journey will fall within the definition of "stage carriage". The sine qua non to attract sub-section (40) of section 2 is that vehicle should be capable of carrying more than six passengers excluding the driver.

If sub-sections (28) and (40) of section 2 are read together alongwith section 72 of the Act, the only interpretation would be that Transport Authority may, on the application made to it, grant a stage carriage permit in accordance with application with such modification as it deems fit subject to the conditions attached to the permit, to use vehicle or stage carriage for the specified area or on a specified route or routes. It means, if vehicle is having less than four wheels fitted with engine capacity of not exceeding 25 cubic centimetres, it will not fall within the definition of "vehicle" under sub-section (28) of section 2 and if vehicle is not capable of carrying more than six passengers, it will not fall within the definition of "stage carriage". Therefore, no stage carriage permit can be granted in favour of such vehicles.

In my considered opinion, if a vehicle does not fall within the definition of "stage carriage", no route can be formulated for such vehicles, which do not fall within the definition of "stage carriage".

At this stage, Mr. A.K. Joshi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, submits that till date no stage carriage has been permitted in favour of any three-wheelers or three-wheelers Vikram, Tempo, Tata Magic or Maximo, therefore, Transport Authorities in the event of receiving any application seeking stage carriage permit shall take into consideration the definition of the "stage carriage" as provided in sub-section (40) of section 2 of the Act as well as Rule 67 of the Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011, and shall take decision thereafter in accordance with law. Further contends that mere addition of an Agenda for discussion in a meeting of RTA does not mean that in any case stage carriage permit has to be granted to those vehicles, which do not fall within the definition of "stage carriage".

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that let all these writ petitions be disposed of in the light of undertaking furnished by Mr. A.K. Joshi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

Order accordingly.

CLMA No. 10304 of 2014 also stands disposed of accordingly. Let copy of this judgment be placed in all the connected writ petitions.