- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Madan Lal v. M.P State Road Transport Corporation, Bairagarh, Bhopal And Others
Factual and Procedural Background
This writ petition challenges the validity of a draft scheme (No. 75 dated March 30, 1973) published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act by the Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation proposing to operate its vehicles on the inter-State route Bhopal–Ajmer via Biaora–Kota to the exclusion of other operators.
Although the scheme was approved by the State Government under Section 68-D of the Act, it had not been published because approval from the Rajasthan State Government and the Central Government had not been obtained. The court noted that no satisfactory explanation was provided by the Corporation and the Madhya Pradesh State Government for the delay. Meanwhile, restrictions under Chapter IV-A of the Act had remained operative. Nearly 13 years having elapsed without publication, the court considered continuation of the scheme unjustified.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether a draft scheme under Section 68-C, approved under Section 68-D but not published due to lack of approvals from the Rajasthan State Government and the Central Government, could be allowed to continue in force after nearly 13 years.
- Whether the impugned scheme proposing exclusion of other operators on the Bhopal–Ajmer inter-State route should be quashed in the circumstances.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Shri Chand v. Government of U.P (1985) 4 SCC 169 | Not expressly stated in the opinion; relied upon in relation to the continued operation of an unpublished/unduly delayed scheme. | The court followed this decision to conclude that there was no justification to allow the impugned scheme to remain in force after a long delay, supporting quashing of the scheme. |
| Phool Chand Gupta v. Regional Transport Authority (1985) 4 SCC 190, Ujjain | Not expressly stated in the opinion; relied upon in relation to the continued operation of an unpublished/unduly delayed scheme. | The court followed this decision, alongside Shri Chand, as authority for quashing the impugned scheme due to prolonged non-publication. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court focused on the prolonged failure to complete the statutory process for bringing the scheme into effect. While the scheme had been approved by the State Government under Section 68-D, it remained unpublished because required approvals from the Rajasthan State Government and the Central Government had not been secured.
The court noted that the Corporation and the Madhya Pradesh State Government provided no satisfactory explanation for their inability to secure these approvals. In the interim, restrictions under Chapter IV-A of the Act continued to operate. The court held that it was not justified to permit a scheme that had not yet been published under Section 68-D to remain in force after nearly 13 years.
Relying on the Supreme Court decisions in Shri Chand v. Government of U.P and Phool Chand Gupta v. Regional Transport Authority, the court quashed the impugned scheme.
However, the court crafted transitional directions: it permitted the Corporation and other operators holding permits under Sections 68-F(1-A) or 68-F(1-C) to continue operating stage carriages on the route until March 31, 1987. It also granted liberty to the State Transport Corporation to issue a fresh scheme under Section 68-C, and clarified that interested persons could apply for permits under Chapter IV, with the Regional Transport Authority empowered to issue temporary permits under Section 62 if required in the public interest.
Holding and Implications
QUASHED: The court quashed the draft scheme impugned in the writ petition.
The immediate effect was that the challenged scheme could not continue to operate. As a transitional measure, existing permit-holders under Sections 68-F(1-A) or 68-F(1-C) (including the Corporation and other operators) were allowed to continue operating stage carriages on the route until March 31, 1987. The Corporation was permitted to issue a fresh scheme under Section 68-C if it wished, and applicants were allowed to seek permits under Chapter IV; the Regional Transport Authority could also issue temporary permits under Section 62 if necessary in the public interest. The opinion does not indicate that it set out any broader implications beyond these directions.
Order
1. In this writ petition the petitioner has questioned the validity of a draft scheme bearing No. 75 dated March 30, 1973 published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “the Corporation”) proposing to run its vehicles on the inter-State route Bhopal-Ajmer via Biaora-Kota to the exclusion of other operators. The scheme was approved by the State Government under Section 68-D of the Act but it has not been published as it has not received the approval of the Rajasthan State Government and the Central Government as yet. There is no satisfactory explanation given by the Corporation and the Madhya Pradesh State Government as to why they have not been able to secure the approval of the Rajasthan Government and of the Central Government. In the meanwhile the restrictions imposed by Chapter 4-A of the Act have been operative. We do not find that there is any justification to allow the scheme which has not yet been published under Section 68-D of the Act to continue to remain in force after nearly 13 years have elapsed. We, therefore, following the decision in Shri Chand v. Government of U.P (1985) 4 SCC 169 and the decision in Phool Chand Gupta v. Regional Transport Authority (1985) 4 SCC 190, Ujjain quash the scheme which is impugned in this petition.
2. We, however, permit the Corporation and other operators who may have obtained permits under Section 68-F(1-A) or 68-F(1-C) of the Act to continue to operate their stage carriages on the route in question till March 31, 1987. We give liberty to the State Transport Corporation, if it desires to do so, to issue a fresh scheme under Section 68-C of the Act. It is open to any person who is interested in obtaining a permit to operate a stage carriage on the route in question to apply to the Regional Transport Authority for a permit under Chapter IV of the Act. The Regional Transport Authority may also issue if it is found necessary in the public interest temporary permits under Section 62 of the Act. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Alert