9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (4) TMI 218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e paramount consideration, while private rights, fundamental though, apparently constitute the quasi-lis for decision. The touchstone of better merit is solely the ability to serve the public, and the hierarchy of transport tribunals, bearing true faith and allegiance to s. 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1948 (for short, the Act) have the duty and, therefore, the power to consider as factors pertinent to the larger scheme of efficient public transport. To equate-and thereby hamstring this jurisdiction and processual law with what governs a civil proceeding under the Civil Procedure Code, is to miss the policing policy of the law and maim the amplitude of the power duty complete. In other words, the duplex scheme of the statute is the holding of a public enquiry to determine who will serve public interest best but ordinarily activated into that enquiry by private applicants for permits. The pro bono publico character of the hearing cannot be scuttled in the name of competitive individual rights and narrow procedural trappings. The minimal facts. The appellant and the 1st respondent, among others, applied for permits to ply a stage carriage on a specified route in the Krishna Distr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal to this Court where the controversy is confined to the validity of s. 15, although we have heard arguments on a wider basis to appreciate the point made by counsel. The argument of ultra vires urged before us rests on The scope of ss. 57(4) and 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act and the fitment of s. 15 into the purpose and text of these provisions. Having heard counsel on both sides, we are disinclined to accede to the submission of Shri Phadke for the appellant. Why ? We will proceed to answer. Rulings galore, of this Court and the High Courts, have focussed A on s. 47 of the Act to emphasize that the quasi- judicial bodies entrust ed with the work of issuing stage- carriage permits must be conscious of the brooding presence of public interest, in the midst of the sparring contest of private applicants. A casual perusal of that provision brings home this juristic under-pinning of the jurisdiction. Against this background, we may notice the meaning of the clauses which - broaden the nature of the enquiry and mark it off from a traditional civil litigation. Passengers' associations, police officers, local authorities and existing operators who may have nothing directly t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis existed prior to the disposal of the applications by the RTA. It was further urged that such new grounds could not be heard from an objector who had not included it in his representation made within the time limited by s. 57(4) of the Act. However, the STAT over-ruled these objections and proceeded on the footing that this was material information A relevant to s. 47(1) and used it, after giving a fair opportunity to the affected appellant to meet it. Consequentially, he upset the award of the permit to the appellant since this factor tilted the scales against the appellant. We cannot, in this Court, and especially on a limited leave, look into the evaluation. These foundational facts are common ground, but the divergence rises on the exercise of the power under s.15 of the Appellate Rules. Shri Phadke contended that a representationist, under s. 57(3) (4), had to abide by the time-limit discipline of the provision and could not transgress it by making an additional representation at the appellate stage beyond the time limited by s. 57(4). If s. 15 permitted such a course, it violated the substantive provision of the Act. Since a stream cannot rise above its source and ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be pressed into service against him. In the pre sent instance, it is not disputed, as the High Court has noted, that the canons of natural justice have been conformed to. The surviving issue therefore is as to whether there is any soundness in the submission that s. 57(3) (4) read with s. 47 builds barricades against receiving any information by the STAT from any representator beyond the time filed in the above sub-sections of s. 57. Administrative law-a growing branch of Indian jurisprudence has a mission. Where the trellis work of technical procedures and rules of evidence usually applicable to ordinary courts under the Code contains too many taboos regarding pleadings and too many prescriptions regarding trials, administrative bodies, manned by lay and legal men, charged with duties which are wider than decision of individual disputes between specific parties and operating quasi-judicially at the public-interest level, have to enjoy more liberal powers and less formal and more flexible processes if they are to fulfil the statutory behest efficaciously. To over judicialize is to undermine. In the construction of statutes establishing administrative agencies and r defining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... blic interest generally and in its ramifications as set out in s. 47(1) (a) to (f). In addition, the RTA shall also receive representations as mentioned therein and take them into the reckoning. It is not as if the sole source of decision making materials consists of the representations made under s. 57(3) within the time stipulated in s. 57(4). The primary channel, it , looks, is the information that the RTA may gather, bearing on matters touched upon in s. 47(1) (a) to (f), supplemented by facts stated in representations referred to in s. 57(3). Once we grasp this essential truth, the resolution of the conflict raised in this case is easy. The focus is not on who, as between A and B, has the title to the permit, but on who, as between A and B, should be preferred to better sene the public interest. We may, as a result of the above discussion, set down the following five propositions: 1. Stage-carriage permits are granted for providing an F. efficient public transport system. 2. The adjudicatory content has dual elements-public interest in the best stage-carriage service and private title to better sene the public. 3. The procedure is flexible, free from-the rigidl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roves purposeful efficiency, is not anathema. But caution must be exercised in going against time tried procedures lest processual law prove a charter for chaos. Like- wise, it is necessary to mention that while a 'representator' under s. 47, read with s. 57, has a right to make representations and be heard, subject to the limitations written into those provisions, those who fall under it or outside it have no right to bring in evidence or urge grounds as and when they please or at all unless the tribunal, in its discretion, chooses to accept such extra information. The first is a right of the 'representator' the second is the power of the tribunal. F We are strengthened in our general approach and particular construction by a ruling of this Court in New Prakash Transport(l) and two rulings of the High Courts, one of a Full Bench of the Madras High Court (AIR 1965 Madras 79) and the other a Division Bench of the Patna High Court to which one of us (Untwalia, J.) was a party (AIR 1964 Patna 154). In United Motor Works(2), the Patna Case, the Court observed: It was also pointed out by the Supreme Court in that case that the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decided in the Patna judgment (one of the two writ petitions heard together) was challenged in the Supreme Court and reversed. That bears upon the interstate routes which does not arise in the instant appeal before us. In Cumbum Roadways(1) Kailsam J. (as he then was), speaking for the Full Bench, stressed the same view. The head note in the Report is sufficiently explicit and we quote: The representator, who makes the representation other wise than under s. 57(4) will not have a right to have his objection heard and considered, but there is no prohibition against the authority taking the information furnished by the objector and acting on it after giving an opportunity to the affected party, to prove that the information is false or that it should not be acted upon. The jurisdiction of the Regional Transport Authority or the Appellate Tribunal to act upon any information, whether it was brought to its notice by the objector or by the Transport Authority cannot be questioned. But it is within the discretion of the Regional Transport Authority or the Appellate Tribunal to accept the information taking into account the relevant circumstances under which the information was bro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
