TMI Blog1964 (1) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the schemes are the previously existing motor transport operators whose permits are liable to be modified or cancelled under the provisions of the Schemes on their coming into force. The impugned schemes were published by Government as G.O.Ms. 292, 293 and 294 of the Homes, Transport Department on the 5th February, 1963 in virtue of the powers conferred on Government by sub-s. 2 of the 68-D of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation which for shortness we shall refer to as the Corporation, besides the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Regional Transport Authority, Kurnool were impleaded as respondents to the petitions. They are also the respondents before us. By reason of the first Scheme, 34 routes were intended to be taken over, while under the 2nd and 3rd, 17 and 13 routes respectively were proposed to be nationalised. The routes covered by these three schemes are all in the western half of the Kurnool District. 3. Before adverting to the points requiring consideration in the appeals, it would be convenient to set out the relevant statutory provisions relating to the nationalisation of Road Transport for it is primarily on their construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e objections raised by persons affected by the Scheme after giving an opportunity to the objectors and the undertaking to be heard in the matter before approving or modifying the Scheme. The Scheme so approved or modified is required to be published in the State Gazette and on such publication it becomes final and is to be called the approved scheme . This is followed by sub-section (3) which reads :- The scheme as approved or modified under sub-s. (2) shall then be published in the Official Gazette by the State Government and the same shall thereupon become final and shall be called the approved scheme and the area or route to which it relates shall be called the notified area or notified route : Provided that no such scheme which relates to any inter-State route shall be deemed to be an approved scheme under it has been published in the Official Gazette with the previous approval of the Central Government. 9. Section 68-E provides : any scheme published under sub-s. (3) of S. 68-D may at any time be cancelled or modified by the State transport undertaking and the procedure laid down in s. 68-C and s. 68-D shall so far as it can be made applicable be followed i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent on the 19th of April, 1963, holding that the objections made to the validity of the schemes would not be sustained. The learned Judges, however, on the application of the Appellants granted a certificate of fitness under Art. 133 in pursuance of which these appeals have been preferred. 14. The points urges by the appellants before us in support of their submission regarding the invalidity of the impugned schemes, were substantially the same as were urged before High Court and which the learned Judges repelled. Briefly stated the principal ones were :- (1) that the schemes did not in reality reflect the opinion of the Corporation that it was necessary in the public interest that the Road Transport services in the area or over the route, specified in the schemes should be run and operated by the State Transport Undertaking as is required by s. 68-C but that the schemes owned their origin to the direction of the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh who acted mala fide in directing the Transport Undertaking to frame the impugned schemes for the areas for which they were purported to be framed; (2) that the decision by the Transport Minister over-ruling the objections raised by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formation of the State of Andhra Pradesh, the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation was established with effect from 11th of January, 1958 with a view to take steps for extending nationalised transport to the Andhra areas of the State. Certain routes in three of the 11 Districts Krishna, West Godavari and Gunture were nationalised from 1959 onwards. The Vijayawada - Masulipatam and Vijayawada-Guntur routs were nationalised in the first instance and thereafter by about September, 1959, almost the entire routes in Krishna District were nationalised. The next district to be taken up was West Godavari which was done in March, 1960. The process was nearly completed in this district by the 1st of February, 1960, except for a few routes. The Government had sanctioned certain schemes for nationalisation in Guntur District which were expected to be completed by October, 1961. The question which was thereafter the subject of consideration was the manner in which and the stages whereby nationalisation of the motor transport throughout the State might be brought about. With this object the Corporation adopted a resolution in 1960 by which it decided to appoint an expert Committee to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce, and arrange to provide all the facilities that are needed for expending its activities to other districts. This report of the Anantharamakrishnan Committee was the subject of consideration by the Corporation and they accepted in March, 1962 the above recommendation regarding the phased programme of nationalisation of district in the order indicated and embodied this recommendation in their Administration Report for the period January 11, 1958, (the day on which the Corporation was formed) to March, 31, 1961 which was submitted to the Government as required by s. 35(2) of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1960, on the 7th of April, 1962. In this last document they said speaking of future trends, the programme for nationalisation of transport services in the remaining of the Andhra Pradesh is as indicated below :- 1961-62 - Guntur District 1962-63 - Nellore and Chittor Districts 1963-64 - Cuddapah and Kurnool Districts 1964-65 - Ananthapur and East Godavari Districts 1965-66 - Vishakhapatnam and Srikakulam Districts . 17. In the impugned schemes, however, the Corporation made an alteration in the order of the Districts successively to be taken up for na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly contested from the Nandikothur Constituency in Kurnool District. (Nandikothur is also in the western part of Kurnool). The person who successfully opposed him Sri P. Venkatakrishna Reddy now M.L.A. is a partner in 'Venkata Krishna Bus Service' Nandikothur. This firm owns 2 permits and they stand in the name of Jayaramayya who was the Election Agent of Sri Venkata Krishna Reddy. Two persons Sri Ganikhan and Sri Antony Reddy who are staunch supporters of the present Chief Minister Sri Sanjiva Reddy were selected as Congress candidates by the Parliamentary Board at Delhi when Sanjiva Reddy was the President of the Indian National Congress, were also defeated in their respective Constituencies. It was considered by one and all that leading transport operators among them, (the petitioners) were responsible for the defeat of these persons and this enraged the feelings of Shri Sanjiva Reddy against the operators in Kurnool District and particularly the operators whose routes lay in the western areas of the District and with a view to cause them loss and to ruin their business this nationalisation of transport in the western part of Kurnool was directed to be undertaken in spite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strict and the profitable nature since these were evaluated by the Anantharamakrishnan Committee whose recommendations were examined and approved by the Corporation, the nationalisation of the routes in Nellore was, however, abandoned and that of the western part of Kurnool was decided upon. The other fact was that the National Defence Council passed a resolution as late as the first week of November, 1962, urging the deferring of further nationalisation of transport services for the present and it was in the teeth of this resolution which was passed at the meeting at which the Chief Minister himself was present that the schemes of nationalisation of transport services in Kurnool district was published by the Corporation on the 29th November, 1962. 21. Before examining whether these allegations have been made out it would be necessary to explain the legal position in relation to which they have to be considered. To begin with the schemes now impugned have been formulated by the Corporation which is an independent semi-autonomous body brought into existence by the State Government by acting under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. Under s. 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rporation, had been framed by the Corporation not at the dictation of the Chief Minister, but as a result of their own independent judgment; and (3) Lastly, the learned Judges held that there was no proof that the Transport Minister who heard the objections raised by the appellants to the schemes was influenced by the Chief Minister or acted at his behest, and therefore that the schemes framed and approved were fully in conformity with the requirements of s. 68-C. 24. The correctness of these conclusions have been challenged before us and the first matter that requires to be considered is as to whether the allegations against the Chief Minister have been made out. The question raised has manifestly to be considered from two aspects. The first is whether the facts alleged which were stated to have been the cause of the Chief Minister's animus against the transport operators in the western part of Kurnool have been established. In regard to this the first point to be noticed is that the contents of the affidavit were not vague, but details were given and these were : (1) The existence of two groups in the Congress Party at the time of the General Elections in 1962, the Chief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of mala fides and of improper motives on the part of those in power are frequently made and their frequency has increased in recent times. It is also somewhat unfortunate that allegations of this nature which have no foundation, in fact, are made in several of the cases which have come up before this and other Courts and it is found that they have been made merely with a view to cause prejudice of in the hope that whether they have basis in fact or not some of it at least might stick. Consequently it has become the duty of the Court to scrutinise these allegations with care so as to avoid being in any manner influenced by them, in cases where they have no foundation in fact. In this task which is thus cast on the courts it would conduce to a more satisfactory disposal and consideration of them, if those against whom allegations are made came forward to place before the court either their denials of their version of the matter, so that the court may be in a position to judge as to whether the onus that lies upon those who make allegations of mala fides on the part of authorities of the status of those with which this appeal is concerned, have discharged their burden of proving ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Mr. S. A. Iyengar has filed a counter-affidavit in which the allegations we have set out earlier have been formally denied. He says, I have been expressly instructed and authorised by the Hon'ble the Chief Minister to state that the allegations suggesting personal animus and giving mandate are false and mischievous and have been deliberately made to create an atmosphere of sympathy . The learned Advocate-General did not suggest that the Court could act upon this second-hand denial by the Chief Minister, as the statement by Sri S. A. Iyengar is merely hearsay. We are, therefore, constrained to hold that the allegations that the Chief Minister was motivated by bias and personal ill-will against the appellants, stands unrebutted. 29. The learned Advocate-General realising this position, desired us to proceed on that bias and his submission was that assuming that the allegations made against the Chief Minister were made out and that he had bias and ill-will against the appellants, still there was no proof that the Corporation which was an autonomous body was similarly motivate and that unless the appellants were able to establish it, bias or ill-will on the part of the Chie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it is admitted that he summoned a conference of the Corporation and it officials at which, and this also is admitted, he suggested that the nationalisation of bus routes in the Kurnool District should be taken up first. Now the Chief Minister himself made a statement as to what he did at this meeting. It is the case of the appellants that it was the mandate given to the Corporation by the Chief Minister at this Conference that brought about this change in the order of the districts to be taken up for nationalisation and not the independent opinion of the Corporation as to what was needed in the public interest as required by s. 68-C. As regards his part at the conference, the Chief Minister himself stated in the Assembly on July 26, 1962 : To say that the Corporation will do everything for the simple reason that it is an autonomous body, and also to say that we will not at all interfere, is not fair. It will not be fair. Now and then we shall have conferences. For example, the Corporation wanted to nationalise Chittor district. We had discussions. Kurnool is surrounded by three nationalised districts; one side Mahaboobnagar, one side Guntur and the other side the district of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Guntur. It also stated that the choice was made in the interest of the maintenance of service contiguity and coordination and it added that the impending completion of the Rangapur Bridge over the river Krishna, which when completed would facilitate the operation of direct services from Hyderabad through Kurnool to the areas beyond. Besides it asserted that the Corporation which was an autonomous statutory authority was vested with powers under the Road Transport Act and it was, therefore, malicious to allege that the decision by the Corporation to prepare the impugned schemes was either influenced by the Chief Minister or was under a mandate from him and it asserted that in formulating the schemes the necessary opinion under s. 68-C was formed by itself. 34. The learned Judges of the High Court have accepted this statement, made on behalf of the Corporation and have replied the attack made on it based on the schemes not having been formulated as a result of the opinion formed by the Corporation itself. The learned Advocate-General commended this approach and this conclusion for our acceptance. He also pointed out that the Anantharamakrishnan Committee had themselves indicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neral submitted to us that under the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950, the Government had a right to give directions as to policy to the Corporation; (2) that the policy direction that he gave related to and included the order in which the districts should be taken up for nationalisation; and (3) that applying the criteria that the districts to be nationalised should be contiguous to those in which nationalised services already existed, Kurnool answered this test better than Chittoor and he, applying the tests he laid down, therefore suggested that instead of Chittoor, Kurnool should be taken up next. One matter that emerges from this is that it was as a result of policy decision taken by the Chief Minister and the direction given to the Corporation that Kurnool was taken up for nationalisation next after Guntur. It is also to be noticed that if the direction by the Chief Minister, was a policy decision, the Corporation was under the law bound to give effect to it (vide s. 34 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950). We are not here concerned with the question whether a policy decision contemplated by s. 34 of the Road Transport Act could relate to a matter which under s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, 1962, the Corporation dropped Nellore altogether, a district which was contiguous to Guntur and proceeded to take up the nationalisation of the routes of the western part of the Kurnool district and were able to find reasons for taking the step. It is also worthy of note that in the resolution of the 4th May, 1962, of the Corporation only one reason was given for preferring Kurnool to Nellore, namely, the existence of a depot at Kurnool because the other reason given, namely, that Kurnool was contiguous to an area of nationalised transport equally applied to Nellore and, in fact, this was one of the criteria on the basis of which the Anantharamakrishnan Committee itself decided the order of priority among the districts. As regards the depot at Kurnool which was one of the two reasons set out in the resolution for the choice of that district in the first instance, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that this reason was one invented to justify the Corporation's action directed against them and to obviate the comment that the reason for the change was political and not for providing an adequate service for the area. He submitted that the so-called depot was merely ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the Corporation. 38. The next submission of the learned Advocate-General was that even assuming the Chief Minister directed the order in which districts were to be taken up for nationalisation, still the scheme framed by the Corporation could not be assailed as not in conformity with the requirements of s. 68-C of the Act so long as the choice of the area in which and the routes in it to be run by the Corporation was made by them alone. This argument proceeds from the circumstance that even taking it that the Chief Minister directed the Corporation to take up the nationalisation of the routes in the Kurnool district in the first instance, there was no allegation that he gave any direction regarding the area in the district and the routes. We fail to see any force in this argument. If the choice of the district was that of the Chief Minister, the fact that within the area of the district pointed out to them, the Corporation selected some area within the district and the routes within that area, cannot on any reasonable construction of s. 68-C be a sufficient compliance with the statute. We are disposed to read the word 'area' in the section as meaning such ' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder s. 68-D(3) and approving the schemes he was uninfluenced by the Chief Minister. We, therefore, consider that there is no basis for holding that the Transport Minister's approval of the schemes does not satisfy the requirements of the law. 41. In view that we take the schemes have to be set aside as not in conformity with s. 68-C of the Act, the other objections raised do not required consideration but in view, however, of the arguments addressed to us on them we shall briefly deal with them. 42. The next point that was urged was that the schemes were not in conformity with s. 68-C of the Act for another reason. A scheme to be published by the Transport Undertaking is required by s. 68-C to give particulars of the nature of the services proposed to be rendered and such other particulars respecting thereto as may be prescribed , prescribed, of course, meaning prescribed by rules . These particulars, it is obvious, are required to be set out in the scheme, so that (a) transport operators running vehicles on the routes might know that they are affected by the scheme and might, if they see sufficient reason therefor, prefer objections under s. 68-D(1); and (b) the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the schemes as promulgated which disclose not the actual number of vehicles that would run or the number of trips which the vehicles would make, do not enable the affected objectors to raise their objections to the adequacy of the service proposed and similarly do not afford requisite information to the approving authority under s. 68D(3) to decide whether to approve the scheme or not, Besides this general objection, it is pointed out that the specification of a minimum and a maximum in columns 4 and 5 is contrary to what has been prescribed by the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1957, made in relation to the particulars to be contained in schemes under Ch. IV-A. Rule 4 of these Rules which have statutory force under s. 68-C requires draft schemes and approved schemes to contain inter alia the number of vehicles proposed to be operated on each route and the total number of trips to be performed daily on each route. By a rule framed on the 26th of December, 1958, the State Government framed a rule numbered as Rule 5 of these Rules which reads : 5. The State Transport Undertaking may at its direction, vary the frequency of services on any of the notified routes or w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aily services proposed to be provided to relation to each route or area, was an indication that a scheme specifying the maxima and minima of the number of buses and services was in conformity with and did not contravene Rule 4. The learned Advocate-General adopted the same line of argument and submitted that the language of Rule 4 did not in terms prohibit the specification of a minimum and maximum and that Rule 5 which this Court struck down as being repugnant to s. 68-E was attracted only when the maxima or minima set out in the scheme was departed from. He, however, conceded that the gap between the minimum and the maximum specified in a scheme might be so wide as to render the same a contradiction of Rule 4 but he submitted that the variations in the 3 schemes before us between columns 4 and 4(a) and columns 5 and 5(a) respectively were so slight as not to amount to a failure to fix the number of vehicles to be operated or the trips they would do on the routes. 46. In the case before us in view of the conclusion we have reached that some of the variations between the maxima and the minima in the number of vehicles proposed to be operated on each route are such as, adopting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obtained. We consider this objection as without force. The route which is proposed to be nationalised under the scheme admittedly lies wholly within the State. The right of the private operators to play their vehicles beyond the State border us not affected by any of the schemes. It would, therefore, follow that the proviso to s. 68-D(3) is not attracted and consequently the scheme does not suffer from the defect alleged. 48. The next point made was that the language employed to indicate the nature of the service in column 6 of the schemes was vague, with the result that operators who had, in fact, been affected by the scheme understood the words employed as not affecting them consequently did not make objections as they were entitled to under s. 68-D(2). We have examined the language employed and we consider that the submission does not deserve serious consideration nor we are satisfied that any party was really misled by ambiguous phrasing of column 6 of the scheme. In fact, learned Counsel did not press this objection after the matter was discussed during arguments. 49. The next series of objections to the schemes are those which arise in civil Appeals Nos. 771 to 778 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 68-F(1) is empowered to issue the permit to the transport undertaking notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Chapter IV and that the section rendered the provisions of Rule 141 of the Motor Vehicles Rules inapplicable to cases covered by s. 68-F(1). We find ourselves in agreement with this view, Besides, s. 68-B of the Act enacts : 68-B. The provisions of this Chapter and the rules and orders made thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in Chapter IV of this Act or in any law for the time being in force to in any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law. 51. Therefore any provisions in Chapter IV which are inconsistent with those contained in Chapter IV-A would to that extent be superseded. No doubt, s. 68-F(1) speaks of an application in the manner specified in Ch. IV which if the words stood alone are capable of being understood as meaning the authority to whom the application has to be made, but as the authority to issue the permit in pursuance of the application is specified as the Regional Transport Authority and as that authority is directed to issue the permit notwithstanding anything in C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pletes all the points that are urged before us. 54. In view of our conclusion that the schemes are vitiated by non-compliance with the requirements of s. 68-C and the Rules made thereunder, we hold that they have to be quashed as not warranted by law. 55. The appeals are accordingly allowed and the appellants are granted a declaration that the schemes are invalid and cannot be enforced. The appellants would be entitled to their costs here and in the High Court - one hearing fee. 56. Appeals allowed. N. Rajagopala Ayyangar , J. 57. When the judgment in the above appeals was pronounced on January 27, 1964 the learned Advocate for the appellants brought to our notice the following order passed by this Court on June 10, 1963 when the interim stay of the operation of the schemes which are impugned in the above appeals, was vacated on the opposition by the State Government : Stay vacated on the learned Advocate-General for Andhra Pradesh giving an undertaking that in case the appeals succeed, the State will compensate the appellants for the loss incurred by them during the period that the appeals were pending in this Court by reason of the fact that they wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
