Civil Writ Petition No.19657 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.19657 of 2011 Date of Decision:19.10.2011 Balvir Singh ...Petitioner Versus State Transport Commissioner, Punjab & Anr. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.A.K.Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) The challenge in this writ petition, is to the notice published in the Motor Transport Gazette (Weekly) dated 1.10.2011 (Annexure P5), in regard to convening of meeting to consider the applications for the grant of stage carriage permits on various routes mentioned therein. 2. The case set up by the petitioner, in brief in so far as relevant, was that in exercise of powers conferred by Section 99 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Central Act No.59 of 1988) and in order to provide an efficient, adequate, economical and properly coordinate road service, the Transport Service Scheme was framed and notified, by way of notification dated 9.8.1990 (Annexure P1). The Government of Punjab has further modified the indicated scheme, in exercise of the powers envisaged under section 99 read with Section 100 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the rules framed thereunder (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act and relevant rules”), by way of notification dated 21.10.1997 (Annexure P2) in this respect. The procedure for plying and mode of grant of route permits is stated to have been provided under Rule 128 of the relevant rules, which is as follows:- “128. Application and mode of grant of permit to State Transport Undertakings and other persons – (1) For securing a stage carriage permit Civil Writ Petition No.19657 of 2011 -2- in respect of a notified area or notified route in pursuance of an approved transport scheme under section 99 of the Act, State Transport Undertaking may make an application to the Regional Transport Authority concerned in the relevant form specified under rule 62 alongwith relevant documents specified under rule 63 of Punjab Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 as and when the same are invited through public notice: Provided that the State Transport Undertaking may make an application for the issue of a stage carriage permit on Inter-State or Monopoly routes at any time. Provided further that in case the notified area or notified route falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Regional Transport Authority, the application shall be made to the Regional Transport Authority in whose jurisdiction major portion of the area or route lies and that Regional Transport Authority shall transmit the same to the State Transport Authority for consideration which its comments thereon. (2) (a) An application by a private operator for the grant of a stage carriage permit shall be made in the form specified under rule 62 alongwith relevant documents specified in rule 63 of Punjab Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 within such time as may be indicated in the notice inviting applications. (b) The substance of application received in response to the notice referred to in clause (a) shall be published at the expenses of the applicants for the information of all concerned and for inviting objection, if any, and the same shall be considered alongwith the applications on a date to be fixed and notified to all concerned by the Regional Transport Authority or State Transport Authority, as the case may be.” 3. According to the petitioner that the applications for grant of route permits are invited through and published in the Motor Transport Gazette (Weekly), managed and controlled by the transport lobby and the same are not invited through others widely circulated newspapers in this regard. 4. Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the petitioner claimed that the notice (Annexure P5) for considering the applications for grant of stage carriage permits is arbitrary and illegal, for want of wide circulation, in the manner depicted hereinabove. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through Civil Writ Petition No.19657 of 2011 -3- the record with his valuable help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant writ petition in this context. 6. As is evident from the record that the notice (Annexure P5) was published in the Motor Transport Gazette (Weekly) of 1.10.2011, convening the indicated meeting on 21.10.2011. It is not a matter of dispute that the petitioner did not apply for obtaining the route permit on the depicted routes, for which, the meeting has already been convened to be held on 21.10.2011. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner did not point out the violation of any legal provisions or material, muchless cogent, for quashing the notice (Annexure P5), so as to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage. 8. In the light of aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant writ petition is dismissed, in the obtaining circumstances of the case. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) 19.10.2011 Judge AS