AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jagannatha Shetty, J.—In this batch of six writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the notification dated 30th May, 1968, issued by the State Government u/s 43(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (''the Act''). By the said notification, the State Government has fixed the rates of freight chargeable in respect of postal mails carried in stage carriages owned by operators other than the State Transport Undertakings.
For the petitioners it was contended that the said notification is invalid and ultra vires of Section 43 of the Act.
Before I proceed to consider the contentions urged, it is necessary to set out the notification and the relevant provisions of the Act.
The Notification dated 30-5-1968 reads as follows:
S.O. 1251 -- Whereas the Government of Mysore considers that it is necessary to fix the rates of freight charges for the postal mails carried in stage carriages owned by operators other than the State Transport Undertakings in the State of Mysore.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 43 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Central Act 4 of 1939), the Government of Mysore hereby issues the following directions to the State Transport Authority, the draft of the directions having been previously published in the Mysore Gazette dated the 9th November, 1967, under Notification No. HD 350 TMA 65, dated the 31st October, 1967 and the objections and suggestions received having been considered in consultation with the State Transport Authority, after giving the representatives of the interests affected an opportunity of being heard as required by the proviso to the said sub-section.
Directions -- The State Transport Authority is directed to fix the rates of freight chargeable in respect of postal mails carried in stage carriages owned by operators other than the State Transport Undertakings in the State having regard to the following matters, namely:--
Subject to a minimum of rupees fifteen per month the rate of freight charges shall be fixed at the rate of half the maximum passenger fare per kilometre for every 37.2 kilograms.
In cases where the stage carriages have to divert from their normal route for the sole purpose of picking up or setting down the postal mails, an additional amount at the rate of 62 paise per kilometre shall be charged; and
The weight of the mails shall be equal to the average of the mails weighed for all the seven days in a week on the routes where mails are carried on all the days of the month and for the six days in a week where they are not carried on Sundays. The freight rate per month shall be worked out on the basis of 30 days or 26 days a month as the case may be.
Section 43, so for as it is relevant for the present case, provides:
43(i) A State Government having regard to--
(a) the advantages offered to the public trade and industry by the development of motor transport, and
(b) the desirability of co-ordinating road and rail transport, and
(c) the desirability of preventing the deterioration of the road system, and
(d) the desirability of preventing uneconomic competition among motor vehicles, May from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, issue directions to the State Transport Authority--
(i) regarding the fixing of rates and freights for stage carriages, contract carriages and public carriers:
(ii) regarding the prohibition or restriction subject to such conditions as may be specified in the directions, of the conveying of long distance goods traffic generally, or of specified classes of goods, by private or public carriers;
(iii) regarding the grant of permits for alternative routes or areas, to persons in whose cases the existing permits are cancelled or the terms thereof are modified in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 68-F:
(iv) regarding any other matter which may appear to the State Government necessary or expedient for giving effect to any agreement entered into with the Central Government or any other State Government or the Government of any other country relating to the regulation of motor transport generally, and in particular to its co-ordination with other means of transport and the conveying of long distance goods traffic:
Provided that no such notification shall be issued unless a draft of the proposed directions is published in the Official Gazette specifying therein a date being not less than one month after such publication, on or after which the draft will be taken into consideration and any objection or suggestion which may be received has in consultation with the State Transport Authority, been considered after giving the representatives of the interests affected an opportunity of being heard.
The section empowers State Governments to give directions in regard to the fixing of fares and freights for stage carriages contract carriages and public carriers, and prohibitions or restrictions of the conveying of long distance goods traffic. The directions shall be published for objections and if any objection is filed, it shall be taken into consideration before issuing those directions. According to the section, consultation with the State Transport Authority is also necessary before issuing any direction. The said Authority can speak for the Regional Transport Authority also. All these statutory requirements have been complied with in the present case before issuing the impugned notification, and there is no complaint on this point.
The petitioners rely on the provisions of Section 48(3) of the Act in support of their submission and, therefore, it is necessary to set out the relevant portion of Section 48(3) of the Act, which reads thus:
48(3). The Regional Transport Authority, if it decides to grant a stage carriage permit, may grant the permit for a service to stage carriages of a specified description or for one or more particular stage carriages, and may, subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, attach to the permit any one or more of the following conditions, namely:--
* * * * * * * *
(vii) the weight and nature of passengers'' luggage that shall be carried free of charge, the total weight of luggage that may be carried in relation to each passenger, and the arrangements that shall be made for the carriage of luggage without causing inconvenience to passengers:
(viii) the rate of charge that may be levied for passengers'' luggage in excess of the free allowance.
* * * * * * * * * *
(xi) the conditions subject to which goods may be carried in any stage carriage in addition to or to the exclusion of passengers;
(xii) that fares shall be charged in accordance with the approved fare table;
* * * * * * * * * *
(xv) that mails shall be carried on any of the vehicles authorised by the permit subject to such conditions (including conditions as to the time in which mails are to be carried and the charges which may be levied) as may be specified.
It is seen from the above provisions that if the R.T.A. decides to grant a stage carriage permit, it may grant the permit and attach to it any one or more of the conditions set out in sub-section (3) of Section 48 of the Act. One of the conditions is that fares shall be charged in accordance with the approved fare table, and another condition is that mails shall be carried on any of the vehicles with specified charges. It can also attach conditions subject to which goods may be carried in any stage carriage in addition to or to the exclusion of passengers.
It was urged for the petitioners that fares could be fixed only in respect of passengers to be carried in stage carriages and contract carriages and freights could be fixed only in respect of goods to be conveyed in public carriers, and this power to fix fares and freights cannot be invoked to determine charges for carrying mails in stage carriages, which power, according to them, is within the exclusive quasi-judicial power of the R.T.A. These contentions proceeded on two assumptions, viz., (i) that there is a difference between ''freight'' and ''charges'', and (ii) that freight is referable to goods which could be carried in public carriers and that no goods are carried in stage carriages or contract carriages.
It is difficult to accept these contentions based on such a right bifurcation of functional operations. Ordinarily, it may be that public service vehicles including stage carriages and contract carriages, are meant to carry passengers for hire or reward. Public carrier means an owner of a transport vehicle who transports or undertakes to transport goods or persons in any public place for hire or reward. Section 43 does not state that the State Government can by a notification issue directions to the State Transport Authority regarding the fixing of fares for stage carriages and contract carriages, and freights in respect of public carriers. Section 43(1)(i) reads "regarding the fixing of fares and freights for stage carriages, contract carriages and public carriers". If we accept the contention for the petitioners, we have to dissect the said clause as ''regarding the fixing of fares for stage carriages and contract carriages'', and ''freights for public carriers''. This would amount to rewriting the said clause, a function which is wholly impermissible for a Court of law to do.
The contention that the goods are carried only in public carriers and that the fixing of freights is referable only to the goods carried in public carriers is not supported by the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 48. There may be goods which may be carried in any stage carriage and that may be in addition to or to the exclusion of passengers. It is open to the R.T.A. to attach to a permit of any stage carriage conditions, subject to which the goods may be carried. This is evident from clause (xi) of sub-section (3) of Section 48 of the Act. Likewise, the R.T.A. may attach a condition to a permit of any stage carriage that mails shall be carried on specified charges.
The word ''charges'' is not defined under the Act, nor the word ''freight'' is defined. But, in my opinion, they have no different meanings.
The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines ''charges'' thus:
Expense (at his own); price demanded for service or goods.
"Freight" is defined as--
Hire of ship for transporting goods: transport of goods by water, charge for this: cargo, shipload; load, burden, hire or let out (ship) for carriage of goods and passengers." There is a neat definition of the word ''freight'' in Law Lexicon by T.P. Mukherjee and K.K. Singh, Vol. I. 1971, Edn., at page 577:
"Freight" in the ordinary mercantile sense is the reward payable to the carrier for the carriage of the goods.
Taking into consideration the above meanings of the words ''freight'' and ''charges'' I cannot ascribe different and distinct meanings to the said words. They are, in my opinion, used synonymously. It is no doubt true that when two words are used in different provisions of a statute, it might mean that they carry different meanings. But regard being had to the well accepted meanings of the words ''charges'' and ''freight'', one cannot say that they are used with different meanings in Section 43(1)(i) and Section 43(3)(xv).
The next contention urged was that the power to specify charges for carrying mails in stage carriages is a quasi judicial power of the R.T.A. and that the said power cannot be interfered with by the State Government and that therefore, it is impermissible for the State Government to issue the impugned notification.
If the power to specify charges is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the R.T.A. in exercise of its quasi judicial power, then, no other authority much less the State Government, can interfere with such power.
The legal position on this question is well settled by the two decisions of the Supreme Court -- B. Rajagopala Naidu Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and Others, and Inter State Transport Commission, New Delhi Vs. P. Manjunath Kamath and Others,
In B. Rajagopala Naidu Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and Others, Gajendragadkar, J., (as he then was) speaking for the Court, observed that the scheme of the Motor Vehicles Act shows that the hierarchy of Transport Authorities contemplated by the relevant provisions of the Act is clothed both with administrative and quasi judicial functions and powers, that when applications are made for permits under relevant provisions of the Act and they are considered on the merits, particularly in the light of evaluation of the claim of the respective parties, the Transport Authorities are exercising quasi judicial powers and are discharging those functions as quasi judicial tribunals and that the Government has no power to issue any order concerning with matters which fall to be determined by appropriate Transport Authorities in exercise of their quasi judicial powers and in discharge of their quasi judicial functions. The said view was reiterated in Inter State Transport Commission, New Delhi Vs. P. Manjunath Kamath and Others, .
R.T.A. and the State Transport Authority are administrative bodies; but they exercise quasi judicial functions in the matter of issue and cancellation of permits, or renewal of permits or altering the timings of permits. In the exercise of that function, the Government cannot interfere. But, attaching a condition specifying the fares and freight cannot be said to fall within the quasi judicial power of the R.T.A. Section 48(3)(xii) states that fares shall be charged in accordance with the approved fare table.
So for as fares and freights are concerned, if any notification is issued u/s 43(1)(i), the R.T.A. is bound to obey the same and attach the rates prescribed by the Government as a condition to any permit of a stage carriage. This is clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in B. Srikantiah and Others Vs. The Regional Transport Authority, Anantapur and Others, wherein it was held:
............... Once a notification is issued by the Government in exercise of the powers u/s 43(1)(i), the conditions of the permit stand statutorily amended by virtue of Section 59(3)(c).
The same principle, in my opinion, should apply to the charges for carrying mails if it is a condition of the permit. I have already held that ''charges'' means nothing but ''freights''. If, therefore, there is a notification issued by the State Government u/s 43(1)(i) specifying the rates of charges for carrying mails in stage carriages, the R.T.A. is bound to specify that rate while attaching the said condition to a permit. In the result, these writ petitions fail and are dismissed with costs. Advocate''s fee Rs. 100/-.