JUDGMENT
C.K. Thakker, C.J.
1. This Notice of Motion is taken out by the Joint Secretary of Bombay Pune Taximen Association, Interveners in the main matter (Writ Petition No. 1762 of 1999) for the following relief in terms of prayer Clause (a). Prayer Clause (a) reads as under:
“(a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to clarify that the order dated 17th October, 2001 passed by this Hon’ble Court in the above petition to the effect it shall not apply taxi, plying point to point on the routes inter region even if the same is registered within Greater Mumbai and respondent No. 8 be directed that such taxi’s should not be given any permit to ply within Greater Mumbai.”
2. In support of the Notice of Motion, an affidavit is filed by Kamlapati R. Dube, Joint Secretary of the Association wherein it was stated that the members of the applicant-Association are plying taxis “between Bombay to Pune”. It was stated that an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 17th of October, 2001 does not apply to the taxis plying ‘point to point’ inter region route from Pune to Mumbai. According to the deponent, in similar cases, the Regional Transport Authorities and officers are permitting plying inter district taxi services on reciprocal basis whereby the vehicles registered at those places namely, at Nasik, Pune and at other stations, are allowed to ply inter region route. Similar treatment, therefore, ought to have been shown to the members of the applicant-Association also, but it has not been done only on the ground that the registration has been done in Mumbai instead of Nasik, Pune or at a place other than Mumbai. It was submitted that place of registration is hardly relevant. The sole criterion must be whether the taxi is plying in Mumbai city or outside the city.
3. It was also stated by the applicant-Association that in the light of the order dated 17th October, 2001, the members of the association were under the impression that a similar treatment would be shown to them and they would be permitted to ply taxis on inter region route from Pune to Mumbai but unfortunately they were informed by the authorities that the bar imposed in the order dated 17th October, 2001 would apply to taxis registered in Mumbai and they cannot be allowed to ply taxis between Pune and Mumbai. Hence, the present application.
4. Our attention in this connection was invited by the learned Counsel for the applicant-Association to an order dated 15th December, 1999 as also an order dated 17th of October, 2001. It was submitted that reading both the orders and particularly the order dated 17th of October, 2001, it is abundantly clear that the Bar would apply to taxis plying in Mumbai city.
5. In the order dated 15th December, 1999, the Division Bench of this Court stated;
“Respondent No. 1 The State of Maharashtra, Chief Secretary. Respondent No. 7 (The Transport Commissioner), Respondent No. 8 (The Regional Transport Authority). Respondent No. 9 (The Commissioner of Police) & respondent No. 10 (The Additional Commissioner of Police Traffic) are directed to ensure that all vehicles plying with the limits of Greater Mumbai strictly comply with the omission norms stipulated by the State Government under Rules 115 of the Motor Vehicles Rules.”
6. The learned Counsel also relied upon the following observations of the Division Bench in the order dated 17th October, 2001;
“We are primarily concerned with taxis plying in Greater Mumbai.”
… … …
It has also recommended that with effect from 1st January, 2002, all transport vehicles over 8 years of age, and plying in Mumbai city (except BEST buses) should be scrapped, unless converted to clean fuel.
… … …
We may, at this stage, notice that large number of taxis plying in Greater Mumbai have already been converted to CNG.
7. Referring to the above observations, the learned Counsel submitted that the members of the applicant-Association may be permitted to ply taxies point to point from Pune to Mumbai. It was stated that the members of the applicant-Association has no objection, if suitable conditions be imposed on them including change of colour of taxis plying ‘point to point’ from Pune to Mumbai. It was stated at the Bar that all the members are prepared to give an undertaking that they will not ply taxis in Mumbai and that such an undertaking can be furnished to the respondent authorities and in case of breach of such undertaking, it would be open to the authorities to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
8. An affidavit in reply is filed by the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Maharashtra stating therein that the respondent authorities had implemented the order dated 17th of October, 2001, passed by this Court. It was stated that it was correct that a representation was made by the applicant-Association and that it was stated that taxicabs ply on the inter region route, Mumbai to Pune on reciprocal basis whereby the vehicles registered at R.T.O. Pune also ply on the route from Pune to Mumbai. It was further stated that the grievance of the applicant-Association was that different yardstick for the same kind of vehicle running on the same route on ‘point to point’ basis was applied on the ground of place of registration but it was stated that since taxis in the instant case have been registered in Mumbai, permission was not granted. But even according to the deponent, the Court was “primarily concerned with the taxis plying in Greater Mumbai” and issued certain directions for phasing out them unless converted to run on CNG/LPG.
9. We have also heard Mr. Rustomji. He stated that even the action on the part of the respondent authorities in permitting taxis to ply ‘point to point’ on Pune-Mumbai route is not legal and not in conformity with the order passed by the Division Bench on 17th of October, 2002. It is, however, not disputed by respondents that such permission has been granted to taxis which have been registered at Pune and at other places.
10. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties and keeping in mind the fact that, the taxis registered at Pune, Nasik or at other places have been permitted by the respondent authorities to ply on ‘point to point’, similar treatment ought to be shown to the members of the applicant-Association also who, according to them, are plying ‘point to point’ from Pune to Mumbai. An appropriate direction has to be issued to the authorities without expressing final opinion one way or other at this stage and subject to the final outcome and also subject to further order. We, therefore, direct the authorities to grant such permission to ply taxis on ‘point to point’ Pune to Mumbai route as the respondent authorities are doing in case of taxis registered at Pune or other places as prima facie, we see substance in the argument of the applicant that place of registration is not relevant and what is relevant is plying of taxis in Mumbai City.
11. It is however, clarified that it is open to respondent authorities to impose appropriate conditions including a condition as to change of colour of such taxis. The respondent authorities are also at liberty to ask for an undertaking from the members of the applicant-Association and on such undertaking being given, they would be permitted to ply taxis.
12. The above order is passed in the light of the fact that taxis registered at other places have been granted such permission by the authorities. Moreover, it was stated by the learned Counsel for the applicant-Association at the Bar that such taxis which are registered in Mumbai plying on ‘point to point’ Pune-Mumbai route are few in numbers i.e. about 50.
13. Taking into consideration over all facts as also the fact that in respect of other taxis which are registered in Pune, Nasik and at other places such permission has been granted by the respondent authorities, the above order is passed.
14. It is further clarified that this order is passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, particularly the Bombay Environmental Action Group that no indulgence could have been shown to the taxis registered at Pune, Nasik and other places. It is, therefore, open to the intervener to take out an appropriate Notice of Motion. As and when such Notice of Motion is filed and come for hearing, an appropriate order will be passed, and the directions issued in the present order will not come in their way.
15. Notice of Motion is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
Authorities to act on copy of this order duly authenticated by Associate of this Court.