Raghuraj Singh Jadon v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Judgment

#2. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH) REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH CHAMBAL DIVISION (MADHYA PRADESH)

(SHRI SUSHANT TIWARI, LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE) .....RESPONDENTS This petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the following: ORDER Supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is invoked to assail the order of M.P. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior dated 22.12.2020 passed in appeal under Section 89 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 upholding the order of Regional Transport Authority, Chambal Division, Morena (M.P.) rejecting the application for substitution of vehicle on subsisting permit. 2 The petitioner is the bus operator having stage carriage permit bearing No. 15/stage/96 for the route Veerpur to Morena with one return trip and this permit was valid upto 31.01.2021. On that permit, petitioner was plying his vehicle bearing registration No. MP06P0821 2008 model having seating capacity (32 + 2). The petitioner filed an application for renewal of permanent permit, which was allowed by Regional Transport Authority, Chambal Division, Morena and the validity of the permit was extended upto 03.01.2026. The petitioner desires to substitute his vehicle bearing registration No.MP06P0821 model 2008 having seating capacity (32 + 2) with the vehicle bearing registration No.MP06P1065 model 2020 having seating capacity (36 + 2), in lieu thereof he filed an application for substitution of vehicle before Regional Transport Authority, Chambal Division, Morena (M.P.) which was dismissed by order dated 7.11.2020 without assigning any cogent and plausible reason. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the M.P. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior in appeal No.22/2020, which was also rejected by the Tribunal. In the case in hand it is not in dispute that petitioner was already plying vehicle bearing registration No. MP06P0821 Model 2008 on the route Veerpur to Morena with one return trip having seating capacity 32+2 and is having permission to ply the vehicle up to 3/1/2026 and now he wants to replace the said vehicle by the vehicle of latest model of 2020 vide registration No. MP06P1065 having seating capacity of 36+2. The only difference is of seating capacity of vehicle as the vehicle which petitioner is plying is of 32+2 and the permission which petitioner wants to ply vehicle is 36+2 and this vehicle is of latest model than the earlier one. Section 83 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as under:- 3 "83. Replacement of vehicles:- The holder of a permit may, with the permission of the authority by which the permit was granted, replace any vehicle covered by the permit by any other vehicle of the same nature." "Rule 84 of the M.P. Motor Vehicle Rules 1994 reads as under:- Replacement of Vehicle authoritised by permits:- (1) If the holder of a permit desires at any time to replace any vehicle covered by the permit by another vehicle, he shall forward the permit or the temporary permit, as the case may be, and apply in Form M.P.M.V.R.-56 (MV Rep. A) to the Transport Authority by which the permit was granted stating the reasons why the replacement is desired and shall also simultaneously:- (i) if the another vehicle is in his possession, forward the certificate of registration of that vehicle, or (ii) if the another vehicle is not in his possession, state the particulars including the model, make and seating capacity of the vehicle proposed to be replaced, and (iii) shall pay the fee as specified in Rule 145. (2) On receipt of an application under sub-rule (1) the Transport Authority may reject the application:- (i) if the another vehicle proposed for replacement differs in material particulars from the existing vehicle, and (ii) if there are arrears of tax in respect of the existing vehicle. (3) If the Transport Authority grants an application for replacement of a vehicle under this rule, it shall all upon the holder of the permit to produce the permit and the certificate of registration of the new vehicle, if not already 4 delivered to it and the Secretary of the Transport Authority shall endorse the permit accordingly under his signature and seal and return it to the holder." The State of Madhya Pradesh has made amendment in the Madhya Pradesh Motor Yan Karadhan Adhiniyam 1991, by notification dated

01.10.2014 by which the provision has been made that if vehicle is under the lease agreement and plied on the stage carries permit then the person has to pay 20% additional tax than the normal other persons, hence the state has also regularized grant of permit on leased vehicle. It is undisputed that 20% additional tax is being paid by the petitioner for plying his vehicle on the aforesaid route and he is having valid permit till

03.01.2026. In such circumstances, the vehicle offered by the petitioner could be covered under the said permit. A bare perusal of provisions of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, rules framed by State Government (M.P. Motor Vehicle Rules,1994) and the amendment made by State Government in Madhya Pradesh Motor Yan Karadhan Adhiniyam, 1991 on 01.10.2014, it is evident that petitioner has fulfilled all the requirements which are necessary to be followed under the said Act, Rules and Gazette notification. Besides this, by replacement of stage carriage, public at large will be benefited and State Government will also get extra revenue by way of tax. Despite this, Regional Transport Authority Chambal Division Morena (M.P.) has rejected the application of petitioner, which was confirmed by the M.P. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior subsequently, which ought to have been allowed by them. For all these reasons, this court deems fit to allow the present petition and the orders dated 07.11.2020 and 22.12.2020 passed by Regional Transport Authority, Chambal Division, Morena (M.P.) and M.P. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Gwalior are set-aside. 5 In view of the aforesaid, the Regional Transport Authority, Morena shall permit the petitioner to ply his substituted vehicle as desired by him through his application. Resultantly, petition stands allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid directions. YOGENDRA OJHA 19:20:59 +05'30' (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE