Karnataka High Court
Bruhat Bangalore City Auto And Taxi ... vs Government Of Karnataka on 8 June, 2012
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
WP 43934/2011
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OVPF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
W.P.No.43934/2011 (MV)
BETWEEN:
Bruhat Bangalore City Auto & Taxi Drivers
& Owners Social Welfare Association (Regd.),
No.445, 2nd Floor, Block No.13, KHB Colony,
Lingarajpuram, Bangalore-84,
rep.by its General Secretary
Sri Mahboob Pasha. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri M.K.Shariff, Adv.)
AND:
1. Government of Karnataka
Sachivalaya, Bahumahadi Kattada,
Bangalore-01,
rep.by Peetadhikari (P),
Transport Department.
2. Chairman,
Regional Transport Authority
and Deputy Commissioner,
Bangalore Urban District,
Bangalore.
3. Secretary,
Regional Transport Authority,
Bangalore (South) Jayanagar,
Bangalkore. ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri T.K.Vedamurthy, HCGP)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents 2 & 3
WP 43934/2011
2
to issue revised letters/memos incorporating the clause for
the issue of Auto-rickshaw permits that the auto-rickshaw
permits on any reasons shall not be transferred, sold to
others and etc.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
1. The relief sought in this petition is for issue of mandamus against the State Government and the Regional Transport Authority, Bangalore Urban District, Bangalore and the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bangalore, to incorporate a condition while issuing auto-rickshaw permits stating that permit so granted shall not be transferred or sold for any reason whatsoever. The second relief sought is consequential relief to the main relief.
2. In W.P.Nos.29453-455/2011 disposed of on 01.06.2012, this Court has considered in detail a similar relief sought by the petitioners therein. In the light of the Government Notification bearing No.Sa.Rie.E.306 Sa.E.Pa.2010 dated 23.03.2011 issued and keeping in mind the factors that were highlighted to by the Transport Commissioner in his communication addressed to the Principal Secretary to Government narrating the evil practice resorted to by the WP 43934/2011 3 moneyed persons in accumulating number of auto-rickshaw permits and trading in the business of running the auto- rickshaws by engaging several drivers exploiting them to the fullest extent and thereby making almost an underworld business ultimately resulting in affecting the interest of the commuters, this Court has observed as under:
"Thus, it has to be stated that while the petitioners cannot seek a mandamus against respondent Nos.1 & 2 to prohibit the transfer of auto-rickshaw permits, the fact remains that respondent Nos.1 & 2 cannot indiscriminately resort to grant permission for transfer of auto-rickshaw permits ignoring the intention expressed in the notifications issued on 23.03.2011 vide Annexure- G making it clear that auto-rickshaw permits shall only be granted to applicants who had auto- rickshaw driving license and the same shall not be granted in favour of a person who is already having a auto-rickshaw permit. The State Government has to evolve a proper procedure guiding the transfer of auto-rickshaw permits and the present procedure adopted in following the procedure provided under Rule 82 of the Rules is not in accordance with law, in as much as sub-rule (6) of Rule 82 of the Rules itself makes it clear that the procedure prescribed in that Rule shall not be applicable for transfer of auto-rickshaw WP 43934/2011 4 permits. It has to be further stated that the State Government has to keep in mind the conditions governing the grant of permit as stated in the impugned notification - Annexure-G while evolving such procedure regulating the transfer of auto-
rickshaw permits. As otherwise, it will defeat the very purpose for which those conditions are imposed while issuing the notification dated 23.03.2011. As long as the said notification dated 23.03.2011 holds the field and as long as the State Government intends to address the menace associated with moneyed persons possessing several auto-rickshaw permits unto themselves depriving the auto-rickshaw drivers to own such permits, by exploiting their position, it is necessary that the State Government comes up with a stand consistent with its object and enacts a procedure governing the transfer of auto- rickshaw permits, as early as possible. Therefore, this writ petition deserves to be and is allowed in part in the following terms:
i) The State Government shall ensure that the transfer of auto-rickshaw permits is consistent with the conditions imposed in the notification dated 23.03.2011 at Annexure-G regulating the grant of auto-rickshaw permits.
ii) The State Government shall take WP 43934/2011 5 necessary steps as expeditiously as possible to evolve a procedure
regulating the transfer of auto-rickshaw permits by incorporating such conditions which are consistent with Annexure-G notification.
3. In the light of the above, this writ petition is also allowed in part in similar terms issuing following directions:
i) The State Government shall ensure that the transfer of auto-rickshaw permits is consistent with the conditions imposed in the notification bearing No.Sa.Rie.E.306 Sa.E.Pa.2010 dated 23.03.2011 regulating the grant of auto-rickshaw permits.
ii) The State Government shall take necessary steps as expeditiously as possible to evolve a procedure regulating the transfer of auto-rickshaw permits by incorporating such conditions which are consistent with notification bearing No.Sa.Rie.E.306 Sa.E.Pa.2010 dated 23.03.2011.
sd/-
JUDGE VP