1964 (11) TMI 125 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Applicability of Bihar section 64A to inter-State route permit proceedings.
2. Challenge to Bihar section 64A validity based on Central section 64A.
3. Conflict and repugnancy between Bihar section 64A and Central section 64A.
4. Interpretation of provisions for revision under Bihar and Central section 64A.
5. Repeal by implication of Bihar section 64A by Central section 64A.
6. Examination of the legislative intent behind Central section 64A.

Analysis:
1. The appeal raised the question of whether Bihar section 64A applied to inter-State route permit proceedings, which was previously decided in S. K. Pasari v. Abdul Ghafoor, confirming its applicability to stage-carriage permits for inter-State routes.

2. The respondent sought to challenge Bihar section 64A's validity based on the introduction of Central section 64A by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1956, arguing for implied repeal due to conflicting provisions.

3. The conflict between Bihar section 64A and Central section 64A was analyzed, focusing on the power of revision granted to the State Government and State Transport Authority, leading to a determination of potential repugnancy between the two sections.

4. The interpretation of the provisions for revision under Bihar and Central section 64A was crucial, emphasizing the need to exhaust appellate remedies before seeking revision and the limitations on the State Government's revisional power.

5. The argument for the implied repeal of Bihar section 64A by Central section 64A was scrutinized, with the court emphasizing the necessity of express legislative intent for repeal by implication, which was found lacking in this case.

6. The legislative intent behind Central section 64A was examined, concluding that both sections could coexist without conflict, except in cases where the State Government's revision power under Bihar section 64A conflicted with Central section 64A.

Overall, the Supreme Court held that Bihar section 64A was neither void nor repealed by Central section 64A, limiting its scope to revisions against non-appealable orders of the Regional Transport Authority. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's order and restoring the permit grant to the appellant Jain.