9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to as the Rules ], and no luggage could be carried on the roof of the vehicle. The prayer in the writ petitions is to direct the respondents therein not to check, levy and collect the compounding fee from the vehicles of the petitioners. 2. The transport operators [hereinafter referred to as the transporters ] are in appeal by special leave before us, claiming that they have the right to carry luggage of the passengers on the roof of their vehicles. In all, there are six appeals and three writ petitions before us, but for the sake of convenience, we will refer to the factual scenario in C.A. No. 1507 of 2007, as the same dicta will also be applicable to the rest of the matters. 3. The transporters operate tourist vehicles between the States of Karnataka and Maharashtra and have been granted tourist permits by the State Transport Authority of Karnataka under Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as the Act ]. The respondents, by their communication/circular dated 15.12.1995 had issued instructions to all the subordinate authorities under the Act to ensure that there was no luggage carried on the roof of the vehicles, as the same was not per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the mandatory nature of the provisions as the phraseology used is that the luggage holds shall be provided at the rear or at the sides or both of the tourist vehicle... . `Shall' is ordinarily used to indicate the provisions to be mandatory. It is also settled position of law that if a provisions (sic.) requires a thing to be done in a particular manner, it has to be so done, or not at all. When the provision indicate place or places where luggage holds are to be provided, by necessary implication, other places for luggage holds stand excluded. In this view of the matter we proceed to accept the interpretation of Rule 128(9) as contended by the learned counsel for respondents. We are not accepting the submission of the petitioner that in the absence of a specific restriction in regard to having luggage holds/carrier on the roof of the vehicle the petitioners cannot be prevented from carrying the goods/luggage on the roof of the vehicle. On the contrary we are of the clear view that luggage has to be stored at the places specifically permitted by sub rule 9(i) viz., at the rear or at sides or both, but not the roof of the vehicle. 6. The transporters are represented by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adequate space for the luggage of the passengers of a tourist vehicle. She states that there is a limit on how much luggage a passenger can carry and such luggage must be stored only in the luggage compartment provided for in accordance with Rule 128 (9). The learned counsel further submits that the incorporation of Rule 93 into Rule 128 is only for the purpose of complying with the dimensions of the vehicle laid down in that Rule and the reference to the ladder for loading luggage on the roof is only for the purpose of excluding the length of the ladder, while calculating the overall dimensions of the vehicle, and does not, in any way, imply that a tourist vehicle may carry luggage on the roof of the vehicle. She further states that Rule 128(9) is a special provision for tourist vehicles only and they would override any general provision like Rule 93, and that loading any luggage on the roof of a vehicle is detrimental to the balance of the vehicle and thereby the safety of the passengers inside the vehicle. Ms. Divan also states that the transporters are duty bound by Rule 128(9) to ensure that there is sufficient space to house the luggage of the passengers and any plea of plac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at right angles to the axis of the motor vehicle between perpendicular planes enclosing the extreme points, 134 shall not exceed 2.6 metres. Explanation.--For purposes of this rule, a rear- view mirror, or guard rail or a direction indicator rub-rail (rubber beading) having maximum thickness of 20 mm on each side of the body shall not be taken into consideration in measuring the overall width of a motor vehicle. ...... (3) In the case of an articulated vehicle or a tractor-trailer combination specially constructed and used for the conveyance of individual load of exceptional length,-- (i) if all the wheels of the vehicle are fitted with pneumatic tyres, or (ii) if all the wheels of the vehicle are not fitted with pneumatic tyres, so long as the vehicle is not driven at a speed exceeding twenty-five kilometers per hour, the overall length shall not exceed 18 metres. Explanation.--For the purposes of this rule overall length means the length of the vehicle measured between parallel planes passing through the extreme projection points of the vehicle exclusive of-- (i) a starting handle; (ii) any hood when down; (iii) any fire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncorporated in every permit. One of the general conditions is that the vehicle is, at all times, to be so maintained as to comply with the requirements of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. The authorities are empowered to cancel or suspend the permit on the breach of any of the general conditions specified in Section 84 or any other condition which is contained in the permit. Section 86 of the Act lays down the power of cancellation and suspension of permit and Section 200 of the Act confers power on the State Government that it may, by notification in the official gazette, specify the various compounding fees for the breach of the permit conditions. 13. Rule 128 (9) is a special provision meant for laying down specifications for a tourist vehicle. The sub-Rule specifically provides that in a tourist vehicle, the permit holder should only provide luggage holds at the rear or at the sides or both, of the tourist vehicle with sufficient space and size. When the Rules specifically make a provision in regard to the place where luggage holds shall be provided by necessary implication, it goes to exclude all the other places of the tourist vehicle for being used as luggage holds. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. In matters of interpretation one should not concentrate too much on one word and pay too little attention to other words. No provision in the statute and no word in any section can be construed in isolation. Every provision and every word must be looked at generally and in the context in which it is used. It is said that every statute is an edict of the legislature. The elementary principle of interpreting any word while considering a statute is to gather the mens or sententia legis of the legislature. Where the words are clear and there is no obscurity, and there is no ambiguity and the intention of the legislature is clearly conveyed, there is no scope for the court to take upon itself the task of amending or alternating the statutory provisions. Wherever the language is clear the intention of the legislature is to be gathered from the language used. While doing so, what has been said in the statute as also what has not been said has to be noted. The construction which requires for its support addition or substitution of words or which results in rejection of words has to be avoided... 17. In Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd., (2003) 2 SCC 111, this Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it rules out any other method. This view has been adopted by the Privy Council in the case of Nazir Ahmed v. King Emperor, AIR 1936 PC 253. By this logic, we are inclined to accept the argument of Ms. Divan that the luggage of the passengers may only be stored in the compartments provided at the sides and/or at the rear of the bus, as the buses are mandated to provide sufficient space for the storage of luggage. 23. There is another argument advanced on behalf of the transporters before us, who claim that the prohibition to carry luggage of the passengers on the roof of the vehicle is an unreasonable restriction and, therefore, violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. In our view, the restriction imposed by the Rule is a reasonable restriction keeping in view the safety of the passengers in a tourist vehicle. Therefore, the Rule cannot be said either arbitrary or unreasonable or violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. At the time of hearing of the appeals, reference was made to AIS specifications to contend that specification so provided support the interpretation given by the Karnataka High Court to Rule 128(a) of the Rules. In our view, this submission of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
