Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/20843/2020 of RAJENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHARY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2020
Court Of Madhya PradeshThe High Court Of Madhya Pradesh WP-20843-2020
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
The High Court Of Madhya PradeshWP-20843-2020
(RAJENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHARYVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
[31][-][12][-][2020]Jabalpur, Dated :Jabalpur, Dated :
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Mr. Ashish Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Devendra Gangrade, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.
Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this matter is squarelycovered by order dated 05/03/2019 passed in W.P.No. 4466/2019 whereinwhile deciding the similar issue, this Court has held as under :- "Learned Authority has exercised the powers conferredunder Rule 77(1-a)(iii) of the M.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994 (in short "Rules, 1994"),which is reproduced below :
"Rule 77, Sub-rule (1-a)- In order to ensure safe, secure and convenient transport services to the passengers, the permit granting authority while granting a stage carriage permit shall abide by the following conditions namely :-
(i) that no stage carriage permit shall be granted on interstate route to a vehicle which has completed 10 years from themanufacture year;
(ii) [ xxx]
(iii) that no stage carriage permit shall be granted for anyroute of the vehicle which has completed (15 years) from the year of manufacture;
(iv) that for long distance route of ( more than 75 kms) in asingle trip, the following category of vehicles with seating capacityshown against each shall be permitted to ply:- 1 Deluxe / Air not less than 35+2 seats*[including]conditioned Bus driver and conductor.
2 Express Bus not less than 45+2 seats, *[including] driver and conductor.
3 Ordinary Bus not less than 50+2 seats, *[including] driverand conductor.
(1-b) the restriction imposed by sub-rule (1-a), in so far asthey relates to the stage carriage registered before coming intoforce of the said rules shall not apply."
Shri Pandey, learned counsel has pointed out that sub-clause(1-b) has been inserted in the M.P.Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994w.e.f. 28/12/2015, according to which, the provision of sub-rule(1), as it relates to the stage carriage registered before coming intoforce of said sub-rule, shall not apply. Learned Authority, beforepassing of the order under sub-rule (1-a)(iii) of the Rules, did notexamine the provision of sub-rule (1-b) by which, provision ofsub-rule (1-a) of the Rules, has been excluded for the vehicleregistered before coming into force of the said rule. Sub-rule (1-a) came into statute w.e.f. 24/11/2010 and the vehicle bearing registration no. MP-20-PA-1077 manufactured in the year 2002 and registered on 22/03/2002.
Admittedly, the provision of sub-rule (1-a) of the Rules,would not apply to the petitioner, hence the impugned order ishereby set aside.
Present petition stands allowed accordingly."
Considering the above and the facts and circumstance of the presentcase, in my opinion, the aforesaid order passed in WP No.4466/2019 shall beapplicable in the present case also mutatis mutandis and the conditionsimposed on the petitioner regarding non-plying of his 10 years old vehicle areliable to be and are hereby struck down.
As a result the petition stands allowed with the aforesaid observations.
C.C. As per rules.
Signature Not VerifiedSAN