Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Banmali Gupta Bus Service vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 January, 2015
Writ Petition No.15086/14. 13.01.2014. Per: S.K. Gangele, J.
Shri Brijesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has filed the petition against the order dated 29.04.2014 (Annexure-P-7) passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior [in short 'STAT"] in Revision No.09/2014. One Matadeen Yadav was granted a permanent permit of State carriage of inter-State route from Tikamgarh to Datia. The permit was valid upto 08.07.2008 in accordance with the reciprocal agreement entered between State of M.P. and State of U.P. under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act 1988. The permanent permit was issued by State Transport Authority U.P. The authority fixed the following timings of the permit:-
izLFkku 06-15 ,-,e- Vhdex<+ vkxeu 01-50
vkxeu 06-55 fnxksM+k izLFkku 01-10
izLFkku 06-57 &&&^^&& vkxeu 01-08
vkxeu 07-10 cEgksjh izLFkku 12-55
izLFkku 07-11 &&&^^&& vkxeu 12-54
vkxeu 07-21 tsojk izLFkku 01-10
izLFkku 07-23 &&&^^&& vkxeu 12-44
vkxeu 07-55 i`Fohiqj izLFkku 12-42
izLFkku 08-05 &&&^^&& vkxeu 12-10
vkxeu 08-40 vksjNk izLFkku 12-00
izLFkku 08-50 &&&^^&& vkxeu 11-25
vkxeu 09-05 >kalh izLFkku 11-00
izLFkku 09-15 &&&^^&& vkxeu 10-45
vkxeu 09-45 nfr;k izLFkku 10-05
Mr. Matadeen Yadav submitted the permit for countersignature to the State Transport Authority, State of M.P. for countersignature. At the time of countersignature, the authority made the following changes in timing.
izLFkku 06-12 lqcg Vhdex<+ vkxeu 02-30
vkxeu 06-52 fnxksM+k izLFkku 01-50
izLFkku 06-54 &&&^^&& vkxeu 01-48
vkxeu 07-10 cEgksjh izLFkku 13-37
izLFkku 07-11 &&&^^&& vkxeu 13-36
vkxeu 07-21 tsojk izLFkku 13-24
izLFkku 07-23 &&&^^&& vkxeu 13-22
vkxeu 07-55 i`Fohiqj izLFkku 12-50
izLFkku 08-05 &&&^^&& vkxeu 12-40
vkxeu 08-40 vksjNk izLFkku 12-05
izLFkku 08-50 &&&^^&& vkxeu 12-00
vkxeu 09-05 >kalh izLFkku 11-40
izLFkku 09-20 &&&^^&& vkxeu 11-25
vkxeu 09-50 nfr;k izLFkku 10-30
The respondent no.4 filed a revision petition before the State Transport Appellate Authority challenging the timing of permit on the ground that the State Transport Authority M.P. had no power and authority to change the timing without permission from the State Transport Authority U.P. The revision petition has been allowed by the STAT by the impugned order on the ground that in accordance with the terms and conditions of reciprocal agreements, the timing of permit cannot be changed by the State Transport Authority of M.P without approval from the State Transport Authority U.P. The STAT quoted one of the conditions of reciprocal agreement with regard to change of timings which reads as under:-
"izkjafHkd le; lkj.kh dk fu/kkZj.k vuqKk i= eatwj djus okys izkf/kdkj ls fcydqy vauafre vk/kkj ij fd;k tk;sxk tks vf/kdre pkj ekl dh dkykof/k ds fy, fof/kekU; gksxk vkSj lsok esa rRdky izpkyu djus ds fy, ,slk izfrgLrk{kj fd;k tk;sxk bl dkykof/k ds nkSjku izfrgLrk{kj djus okys izkf/kdkj] vuqKk i= eatwjh djus okys izkf/kdkj ds ijke'kZ ls le; lkj.kh dks vafre :i nsxk A"
The terms and condition of reciprocal agreement entered between the State of M.P. and State of UP are statutory in nature because the agreement was entered between the State of M.P. and U.P. in accordance with the provision of Motor Vehicles Act 1988, and the terms and conditions of the agreement has also been published in the Official Gazette. Section 88 (5) and (6) of the Act 1988 provides agreement between the States to fix the number of permits and grant of countersignature of permits. The same read as under:-
"(5) Every proposal to enter into an agreement between the States to fix the number of permits which is proposed to be granted or countersigned in respect of each route or area, shall be published by each of the State Governments concerned in the Official Gazette and in any one or more of the newspapers in regional language circulating in the area or route proposed to be covered by the agreement together with a notice of the date before which representations in connection therewith may be submitted, and the date not being less than thirty days from the date of publication in the Official Gazette, on which, and the authority by which, and the time and place at which, the proposal and any representation received in connection therewith will be considered.
(6) Every agreement arrived at between the States shall, in so far as it relates to the grant of countersignature of permits, be published by each of the State Governments concerned in the official Gazette and in any one or more of the newspapers in the regional language circulating in the area or route covered by the agreement and the State Transport Authority of the State and the Regional Transport Authority concerned shall give effect to it."
Section 88 (6) of the Act 1988, prescribes that agreement so far as it relates to grant of countersignature of permits, be published by each of the State Governments concerned in the Official Gazette. Hence, the State of M.P. was not authorized to change the timing of permit without approval from the State of UP at the time of countersignature of permit.
The impugned order passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal is in accordance with law. No error of jurisdiction has been committed by the Tribunal. Hence we do not find any merit in this petition. It is hereby dismissed.
(Rajendra Menon) (S.K. Gangele)
Judge Judge
pb