No consideration can be shown to State Transport Corporation unless scheme as per Ch. VI of MV Act is finalised by Government

High Court of Himachal Pradesh: While deciding a Civil Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution praying to quash the order of the RTO, Dharamshala wherein he revised the departure time of the bus of the petitioner, a two-Judge Bench of Sanjay Karol, Acting CJ and Sandeep Sharma, J. observed that the time table was repeatedly changed by the Authority concerned to the detriment of the petitioner, and directed the Authority to rectify its mistake.

The case of the petitioner was that since there were various buses run by HRTC and JNNURAM, Bus Stand Management and Development Authority, purposely got timing of their buses fixed one minute to five minutes in advance or after timings of the bus of the petitioner, as a result of which, great prejudice is being caused to the petitioner. Petitioner’s further grievance was with regard to frequency fixed by State of H.P. for the private operators.

The Court was of the view that matter was required to be considered and decided by the respondents impartially, without there being any bias. It was observed that Chapter-VI of the Motor Vehicles Act, authorizes the government to nationalize the routes, in case the government finds necessity for the same. Until and unless, scheme as per Chapter VI is finalized by the government, no other and further consideration can be shown and extended in favor of HRTC.

The petition was disposed of with the direction to the respondents to convene meeting of all the parties concerned and thereafter fix time table for departure/arrival of the buses being operated by HRTC and private operators. [New Prem Bus Service v. State of H.P., 2017 SCC OnLine HP 1354, order dated 6.09.2017]

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.