IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 17142 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : 13.03.2008 Amloh Bus Service (Regd.), Gobindgarh .... PETITIONER Versus The State Transport Commissioner, Chandigarh and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr. Sachin Midha, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. N.D.S. Mann, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for the respondents. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of orders dated 26.4.1990 and 24.7.1996, passed by the State Transport Commissioner, Punjab, exercising the powers of Regional Transport Authority, Patiala (hereinafter referred to as `the STC') and the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the Appellate Tribunal'), respectively, whereby two regular stage carriage permits for plying two return trips dailyon Ropar-Chandigarh via Kakron route was granted in CWP No. 17142 of 2007 -2- favour of the State Transport Undertaking i.e. the Punjab Roadways, Chandigarh, for a period of three years. The petitioner was also one of the applicants for the aforesaid permits, but the STC granted permits to the Punjab Roadways, while coming to the conclusion that for the inter-state route, only State Transport Undertakings can be granted regular stage carriage permits. Against the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 89 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal on 24.7.1996, while observing as under : “Para No.2 of the notification dated 11.08.1989 transpires that all inter State routes shall be operated by the State Transport Undertakings (STI) henceforth and the present operation of the private operators shall remain ineffective till the validity of their route permit. Rule 3 also reveals that all inter state routes shall be operated with the reciprocal agreement with the concerned State and the Union Territory. The policy and the rules framed by the State Government has force of law as it has been held by the Apex Court of India in AIR 1992 SC 1888 Ram Kishan Verma Versus State of UP. It has been made clear in the aforesaid authority that draft scheme made under Section 68 (c) and approved under Section 68 (d) shall operate as a law and it excludes a private operator from the area or route or a portion thereof covered under the Scheme. The learned counsel CWP No. 17142 of 2007 -3- for the petitioner could not cite any other authority wherein the principle of law laid down referred above would have been distinguished or over ruled. Therefore, the Rules framed by the State made it clear that the inter-State route shall be operated by STU. Therefore, there was no necessity to file the application by the State to get the permit. The State Government Undertaking was competent and eligible to operate on inter State route. Thus, there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order under assail.” We do not find any illegality in the aforesaid order or any ground to entertain this petition, which has been filed at the highly belated stage after more than 10 years of the passing of the impugned order. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE March 13, 2008 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ndj JUDGE