wp548.10.odt 1/7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD ICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.548/2010 Petitioners :- 1. Prince Tours & Travels through its Proprietors Shri Devendra s/o Dyaneshwarrao Rajgure & Shri Chandrasekhar s/o Dyaneshwarrao Lambatkar, Ambagate, Amravati. 2. Hanumangir Maharaj Travels through its Proprietor Shri Gendlal s/o Kisanlal Itankar, "Shanti Prakash", Krishnarpan Colony, Near Garden, Amravati. 3. Prabhat Tours & Travels through its Proprietor Amit s/o Shyamkant Kaloti, "Chandrama" Balaji Plot, Amravati. 4. Bharat Darshan Travels through its Proprietor Mohammad Harun Mohammad Latif, Almas Colony, Juni Basti, Badnera, District Amravati. 5. D.K. Travels through its Proprietor Shri Bhushan s/o Digambarrao Bhamkar, "Kalakunj", Kolhatkar Colony, Dasera Maidan Road, Amravati. 6. Rithe Travels through its Proprietor Shri Padmakar s/o Sukhdeorao Rithe, C/o Shri Kale, Namuna Lane No.5, Amravati. 7. K.N. Joshi Bus Service through its Proprietor Shri Kanhaiyalal s/o Nandlal Joshi, "Leela Bhavan", C/o Vitthal Maharaj Purohit, Satkhiradi, Amravati. ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:01:00 ::: wp548.10.odt 2/7 8. Jijaee Travels through its Proprietor Shri Sanjay s/o Motiramji Satpute, Near Ramkrishna Vidyalaya, Ambagate, Amravati. 9. Shivam Travels through its Proprietor Shri Suresh s/o Ganpatrao Chopkar, "Dattatraya", Near Neelam Hotel, Badnera Road, Amravati. 10. Sainath Travels through its Proprietor Shri Suresh s/o Balkrishna Wange, Near Maheshwar Temple, Amba Vihar, Amravati. 11. Mangalmurti Travels through its Proprietor Shri Nandkishore s/o Bhaurao Kadam, Takiya Ambagate, Amravati. 12. Shri Travels through its Proprietor Shri Nitin s/o Rameshrao Dafe, in front of Satpuda Jin, Warud, District Amravati. 13. Shivkrupa Travels through its Proprietors - Shri Satish s/o Madhukarrao Gaikwad & Shri Prashant s/o Madhukarrao Gaikwad, C/o Mohit Medicals, Shirpur Jain, Taluka Malegaon, District Washim. 14. Jai Ambe Travels through its Proprietor Shri Sachin s/o Manoharbhai Chauhan, Khamgaon Road, Chikhali, District Buldhana. 15. Akash Travels through its Proprietor Shri Aatmaram s/o Gangaram Nesnetkar, Kaulkhed, Akola. ...Versus... Respondents :- 1. State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Home Department (Transport), Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:01:00 ::: wp548.10.odt 3/7 2. The Transport Commissioner - State Transport Authority, 3rd and 4th floor, Administrative Building, Near Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony, Bandra (East), Mumbai. 3. Regional Transport Officer, Amravati. 4. Deputy Regional Transport Officer, Washim. 5. Deputy Regional Transport Officer, Buldhana. 6. Deputy Regional Transport Officer, Akola. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri Anand Parchure, Adv. for petitioners] [Smt. B.H. Dangre, Addl. G.P. for respondents] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM :- S.A. BOBDE A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ.
DATED :- 15.06.2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : S.A. BOBDE, J.) 1. Heard. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of learned Counsel for the rival parties.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the
circular dated 30.5.2009, issued by the Transport Commissioner,
directing that no vehicle shall be registered without permit in the
State.
3. The petitioners, who are transport operators and have
already purchased omnibuses, have approached this Court for setting
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:01:00 :::
wp548.10.odt 4/7
aside the aforesaid circular on the ground that registration is primary
duty of the authorities under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which
cannot be made conditional upon holding of permit.
4. Word ‘permit’ is governed by the provisions under
Chapter V of the Motor Vehicles Act and it includes permits of broad
category such as the use of vehicle as a transport vehicle vide
Section 66, stage carriage permits vide Section 72, private service
vehicle permit vide Section 76, goods carriage permit vide Section 77
and temporary permits for special purposes i.e. for conveyance of
passengers on special occasions such as to and from fair and religious
gatherings or seasonal business etc. We, therefore, find in the first
instance that the circular which directs that no vehicle shall be
registered without permit is grossly vague and its intention cannot be
discovered.
5. The learned Additional Government Pleader for
respondents, however, submitted that the Commissioner of Transport
has by the impugned circular insisted for permit before registration
because a large number of buses are being used without a ‘State
permit’. What is, however, important to see is whether the
respondents have any authority in them to refuse registration without
insisting for State permit.
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:01:00 :::
wp548.10.odt 5/7
6. Section 39 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads thus.
“39. Necessity for registration. –
No person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of
a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be
driven in any public place or in any other place unless the
vehicle is registered in accordance with this chapter and
the certificate of registration of the vehicle has not been
suspended or cancelled and the vehicle carries a
registration mark displayed in the prescribed manner :
Provided that nothing in this section shall
apply to a motor vehicle in possession of a dealer subject
to such conditions as may be prescribed by the Central
Government.”
7. Section 40 and 41 of the Motor Vehicles Act provide for
registration and Section 43 provides for temporary registration of the
vehicle. It appears from a joint reading of the aforesaid Sections that
registration of vehicle is the primary duty of a owner of the vehicle and
therefore, the law imposes a corresponding duty on the authorities to
grant such registration in accordance with the conditions stipulated by
the Motor Vehicles Act. We do not find any provision which permits the
imposition of a condition to the effect that owner of the vehicle must
have obtained any permit before he applies for registration of the
vehicle. It follows therefore that the Transport Commissioner is not
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:01:00 :::
wp548.10.odt 6/7
entitled to impose any special condition such as the requirement of
obtaining a permit before registration of vehicle. It is well settled that
subordinate legislation, rules, regulations, circulars can supplement
the statutory provisions and the Courts would also uphold the same.
But the circular dated 30.5.2009 clearly supplants the provisions of
Motor Vehicles Act as discussed above. The Courts would not uphold
such an attempt through Circular to supplant the express provisions of
Central Law. We may, however, make it clear that in appropriate
cases, temporary registration of the vehicle can be granted. We find
that in order to overcome practical difficulties, which may arise, the
law provides for the temporary registration. However, registration
per se is something that cannot be denied on the condition upon
obtaining of permit by vehicle owner. The registration of vehicle qua a
person is must in order to fix its responsibility for several purposes.
Permits are intended for use for special purposes enumerated in the
Motor Vehicles Act. In a given case, the owner of the vehicle may
intend to use his vehicle for special purpose such as transport etc., for
which case, he must obtain permit. It is equally possible that a vehicle
may be stopped from being used for the special purpose. Throughout,
however, registration of the vehicle is a must and there is no
alternative to it.
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 16:01:00 :::
wp548.10.odt 7/7
8. In the circumstances, we strike down the impugned circular
dated 30.5.2009 and direct the Commissioner of Transport to consider
applications for registration of new vehicles in accordance with law.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
JUDGE JUDGE
ssw
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:01:00 :::