http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: ASHUTOSH SWAIN ETC. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT01/03/1985

BENCH: DESAI, D.A. BENCH: DESAI, D.A. SEN, AMARENDRA NATH (J)

CITATION:  1985 AIR  493            1985 SCR  (3)   1  1985 SCC  (2) 636        1985 SCALE  (1)376

ACT:          All India permits, concept of-Whether the holder of an existing  contract carriage  permit alone  is eligible to make an  application for  endorsement of his existing permit enabling the  permit holder to ply a tourist vehicle on all- India operation  and not  new applicants  for  the  contract carriage permits  Orissa Tourist Vehicles Rule, 1967, Rule 3 (2), (3)  and (4)  applicability of Motor Vehicles Act, 1959 section 63 (7) as introduced by amending Act 56 of 1969 with effect from  October, 1970 read with sections 2 (25), 2 (29- A) 2  (33), 49, 50, 51, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 and 63 (7), scope of

HEADNOTE:      In response  to an  advertisement dated 25th June, 1974 issued by  the State  Transport Authority,  Orissa  inviting applications in the prescribed forms, from the operators for all-India Tourist  Permit, a  number of  intending operators including the appellants submitted their applications and at the meeting  held on  February 2,  1975, the State Transport Authority  granted   to  the  appellants  all-India  Tourist Permits for  omnibus with  passenger capacity  not exceeding 29. Some  of the  applicants who  failed to  obtain a permit filed three  appeals being  M. V. Appeals Nos. 15, 16 and 17 all of  1975 to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal under sec. 64  (2) of  the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed  all the  appeals and confirmed the order made by  the State  Transport Authority   granting all-India tourist  permits   to  the  appellants.  Three  unsuccessful applicants for  permit filed  three writ petitions styled as C.J.C. No.  381, 182  and 881,  all of  1976 questioning the correctness of  the order  granting the permit and dismissal of their  appeals in  the High  Court of  Orissa. A Division Bench of  the High  Court, by a common judgment, allowed all the three  writ petitions  quashing and  setting  aside  the order of  the State Transport Authority. Consequently, these appellants surrendered  their  permits.  Hence  these  three appeals by  special leave.  During  the  pendency  of  these appeals The  appellants  were  granted  temporary  all-India tourist permits  in compliance  with the interim orders made by the Court.      Allowing the appeals, the Court

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

2 ^      HELD: 1.1  It was not necessary that the applicants for an  all-India   tourist  permit  must  have  a  pre-existing contract carriage  permit which  could  be endorsed so as to convert it into all-India tourist permit [11 B-C]      1.2 By  introducing sub-section  7 in section 63 of the Motor Vehicles  Act the  concept of  all-India permit  to be granted by a State Transport Authority of a State within the limits of  the quota  prescribed by  the Central  Government which would  enable the  holder of  the permit to operate in the whole  of India, was introduced, for the first time with effect from  1st October,  1970. The  underlying object  for creating this new class of permit was to promote tourism and to remove  the barrier  caused by  the earlier  system under which if  a tourist  vehicle is hired by a tourist party for moving from  State to  State, the vehicle cannot be taken to another State  from the  place of  commencement  of  journey unless a  valid contract  carriage permit  of that  State is obtained or  the existing  permit is  counter-signed. [6G-H, 7A-B]      1.3 An  Application for an all-India tourist permit has to  be  processed  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of sections 49,  50, 51, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 and 63 (7). An all- India tourist permit is primarily a contract carriage permit but while  the ordinary  contract  carriage  permit  can  be granted by  the Regional  Transport Authority, for operation within  local   jurisdiction,  or   when  counter-signed  by Regional Transport  Authority of  adjacent area in more than one such  jurisdiction but not at any rate outside the State and not  in any  case on an all-India basis. To this extent, an ordinary  contract carriage  permit differs  from an all- India tourist  permit but  an all-India  tourist  permit  is none-the-less a contract carriage permit. Sub-section (7) Of section 63  on the  other hand  confers power  on the  State Transport Authority  to grant  an all-India  tourist  permit which in  effect is  a contract  carriage permit  but  which permits plying of tourist vehicle throughout India. Even for obtaining such  a permit,  section 51  will apply  with this modification that  the application  for  all  India  tourist permit has  to be  made to  State Transport Authority of the State in  which their  permit is  sought. This scheme of law nowhere expressly  or by necessary implication suggests that an  applicant  for  an  all-India  tourist  permit  must  of necessity or  as a  prerequisite have  a  contract  carriage permit which  alone can  be endorsed for the purpose of all- India operation.  Sub-section (7) of section 63 if read thus would render  nugatory the  affirmative provision  that on a proper application  being made  and legally  processed,  the State Transport  Authority can  grant an  all-India  tourist permit. [6D, 7E-H, 8C-D]      1.4 The  fact that  an  application  for  an  all-India tourist Permit  has  to  be  made  under  section  49  which prescribes  procedure  for  obtaining  a  contract  carriage permit, because  in substance an all-India tourist permit is none-the-less a  contract carriage  permit but  with a  much wider  area  of  operation,  however,  does  not  permit  an inference that before obtaining an all-India tourist permit, the intending  operator  must  obtain  a  contract  carriage permit from the Regional Transport Authority and then get it endorsed from the State Transport Authority to make it valid for the  whole or  any part  of India.  Sub-section  (7)  of section 63 does not speak of any 3 endorsement on  permit, though  endorsement may  be  another

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

mode of   enlarging  the area  of  operation  It  speaks  of granting a  permit valid  for the whole or any part of India when granted  by a  State Transport Authority in exercise of The power conferred by sub-section (7) of section 63 without any further endorsement of any other authority [8E-H]      2. Sub-Rules  (2), (3)  and (4) of Rule 3 of the Orissa Tourist Vehicles  Rules, 1967  had absolutely no application to the proceedings of the State Transport Authority held for consideration of  applications for  all India Tourist Permit and granting  them  to  the  appellants.  These  Rules  were enacted in  the year 1967 in exercise of the power conferred by section  68 of  the Motor  Vehicles Act,  1939  and  were brought into operation on 19/20 June, 1967. These rules were made at  a time  when the  only way  to enlarge  the area of operation in  respect of  a permit  was  by  endorsement  by various authorities  on the  original permit  granted  by  a Transport  Authority.  All  India  tourist  permit  was  not conceptualized  by   the  time   1967  Rules   were  framed. Therefore, the  rules at  the relevant  time  catered  to  a situation When the area of operation specified in a contract carriage  permit   could  be   enlarged  by  endorsement  by authority other than the grantor only. [9F-H; 10A]      3. The applications of the appellants with all relevant information  were   complete  and   the  blanks   in   their application forms  were  irrelevant.  In  the  advertisement issued by  the State  Transport Authority  on June  24, 1974 inviting applications  for permits  in  respect  of  omnibus authorising it to ply as an all-India tourist vehicle in the prescribed forms,  two prescribed  forms were  annexed.  The first form  was meant for those who had no existing contract carriage permit and were applying straightaway for the first time for  an all-India tourist permit. The form itself shows that the  application had  to be made to the State Transport Authority for  a contract  carriage permit with an all-India operation. There was another form which catered to the needs of the  holder of the existing contract carriage permits who wanted the area of operation to be enlarged by converting an ordinary contract  carriage permit  into  all-India  tourist permit. For a fresh applicant like the appellants who had no existing contract  carriage permit,  therefore,  the  blanks could not have been filled in. [10F-H; 11A]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: CIVIL Appeals Nos. 2498- 2500 of 1978.       From the Judgement and Order dated 15th November, 1978 of the  High Court  of Orissa  at Cuttack in O.T.C. No. 381: 182 and 881 of 1976.       Shanti Bhushan and P. N. Misra for the appellants.      L. N.  Sinha, R.  K. Mehta  and A.  P. Mohanty, for the Respondents. 4      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      DESAI, J.  These three appeals are directed against the common judgment  rendered by  the High  Court of  Orissa  at Cuttack in  three writ  petitions styled as C.J.C. No. 38 i, 182 and  881, all  of 1976  moved by the appellants in these appeals. A  common question  of law  permeates  these  three appeals and therefore, factual matrix will be extracted from C. A.  No. 2499/78  filed  by  one  Mr.  Ashutosh  Swain  as representative of  the facts necessary for disposal of these appeals.        State   Transport   Authority,   Orissa   issued   an

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

advertisement dated  June 24,  1974 inviting applications in the prescribed  form for  endorsement in  the permit  of the motor cabs  or omnibuses  enabling the holders of the permit to ply  the vehicle  as a  tourist  vehicle  with  all-India operation. In  other words,  applications were  invited from the operators  for all-India  tourist permit.  The last date for receiving the applications was July 13, 1974 In response to the advertisement number of intending operators including the appellants in these appeals submitted their applications for grant  of all-India  tourist  permit  to  the  concerned authority  within   time.  The   State  Transport  Authority processed   these   applications   and   disposed   of   the applications at  its meeting  held  on  Feb.  2,  1975.  The appellants herein were granted all-India tourist permits for omnibus with  passenger capacity  not exceeding  29. Some of She applicants  who failed  to obtain  a permit  filed three appeals being  M. V. Appeals Nos. 15, 16 and 17, all of 1975 to  the   State  Transport  Appellate  Tribunal  (’Appellate Tribunal’ for short) under Sec. 64 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939  (Act for short). The Appellate Tribunal dismissed all the  appeals and  confirmed the  order made by the State Transport Authority  granting all-India  tourist permits  to the appellants. The writ petitions came to be filed by three unsuccessful   applicants   for   permit   questioning   the correctness of  the order  granting the permit and dismissal of their  appeals division  Bench of  the High  Court  by  a common  judgment   allowed  all  the  three  writ  petitions quashing and  setting aside the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal as well as the State Transport Authority. Consequently these  appellants  surrendered  their  permits. Hence these  three appeals  by  special  leave.  During  the pendency of these appeals, appellants were granted temporary tourist permits  in compliance  with the interim orders made by this Court. 5      Mr. Shanti  Bhushan, learned  counsel who led on behalf of the appellants urged that the High Court erred in holding that only the holder of an existing contract carriage permit alone was eligible to make an application for endorsement of his existing  permit enabling  the permit  holder to  ply  a tourist vehicle  on all-India  operation,  and  consequently quashing  the  all-India  tourist  permits  granted  to  the appellants on  the sole  ground that  the appellants did not have or  hold existing contract carriage permit. It was next contended that  the High  Court  was  further  in  error  in holding that  the applications  made by  the appellants were incomplete as  some of  the columns were found blank. It was further submitted  that the  High  Court  was  in  error  in relying upon  sub-rules (2),  (3) and  (4) of  Rule 3 of the Orissa Tourist  Vehicles Rules,  1967 (1967 Rules for short) because the concept of all-India tourist permit received for the first  time a legal format on the introduction of sub-s. (7) in  Sec. 63  of the Act by Amending Act 56 of 1969 which came into force on October 1, 1970.      The scheme  of the  Motor Vehicles Act forbids an owner of a transport vehicle to use or permit the use of a vehicle in any public place (whether or not such vehicle is actually carrying any passenger or goods) save in accordance with the conditions of  a permit  granted  or  countersigned  by  the authority therein  mentioned  authorising  the  use  of  the vehicle in  the place and in the manner in which the vehicle is to  be used. The expression ’transport vehicle’ is termed in Sec.  2 (33) of the Act to mean ’a public service vehicle or a  goods vehicle.  ’Public service vehicle’ is defined in Sec. 2  (25) of  the Act  to mean ’any motor vehicle used or

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

adapted to  be used  for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward,  and includes a motor cab, contract carriage, and stage carriage’.  Thus the scheme of the Act envisages three kinds of  permits in  respect of  a public  service vehicle, namely, permit  for the  use of motor cab or a permit to use an omnibus for contract carriage or a permit to use the same as a  stage carriage. Sec. 46 provides for application to be made for  stage carriage  permit.  The  holder  of  a  stage carriage permit  can use the vehicle to carry passengers for hire or  reward at  separate fares paid by or for individual passengers, either  for the  whole journey  or for stages of the journey.  The second  kind of  permit in  respect  of  a public service  vehicle is  the one  contemplated by Sec. 49 and styled  as ’contract  carriage  permit.’  A  vehicle  in respect of  which there is a contract carriage permit can be used for  carrying passengers  for hire  or reward  under  a contract express  or implied for the use of the vehicle as a whole at or for a fixed or agreed rate 6 of sum-(i)  on a time basis whether or not with reference to any route  or distance,  or (ii)  from one point to another, and in  either case without stopping to pick up, or set down along the  line of  route passengers  not  included  in  the contract, and  includes a motor cab notwithstanding that the passengers may pay separate fares. By the Amending Act 56 of 1969, a  concept of  a tourist  permit for a tourist vehicle was introduced  in the  Act. ’Tourist vehicle’ is defined in Sec. 2  (29A) to  mean ’a  contract carriage  constructed or adapted and  equipped and maintained in accordance with such specification as  the State  Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in that behalf. By the same Amending Act,  sub-s (7)  of Sec. 63 was introduced enabling State Transport  Authority of  any State  to  grant  permits valid for the whole or any part of India, in respect of such number of tourist vehicles as the Central Government may, in respect of  that State,  specify in  this behalf,  and  such applications  have   to  be  dealt  with  according  to  the provisions of  Sections 49, 50, 51, 57, 58, 59, 59-A, 60, 61 and 64.  Section 44 confers power on the State Government to set up  such transport  authorities in the State being State Transport Authority  and Regional  Transport Authority.  The State Transport  Authority will  have its  jurisdiction over the whole  State and  the State will be divided into various regions in  respect of  which a Regional Transport Authority will be specified- Any one desiring to obtain either a stage carriage permit  or a  contract carriage permit has to apply to the  Regional Transport  Authority in  whose jurisdiction the vehicle  is sought to be operated. Sec. 63 provides that permit granted  by the  Regional Transport  Authority of any region shall  not be  valid in  any other  region unless the permit has  been counter-signed  by the  Regional  Transport Authority of that region and a permit granted in one P State shall not  be valid in any other State unless counter-signed by the  State Transport  Authority of that other State or by the Regional  Transport Authority  concerned This  scheme of law would  manifestly  reveal  that  a  permit  without  the necessary  counter   signatures  as  hereinabove  indicated, enabling the permit-holder to have the whole of India as its area of operation was unknown to the Act. By introduction of sub-sec. (7)  in Sec.  63, the  concept of  a permit  to  be granted by  State Transport  Authority of a State within the limits of  the quota  prescribed by  the Central  Government which would  enable the  holder of  the permit to operate in the whole of India, was introduced. For the sake of brevity, this permit is described as all-India tourist permit.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

7      Sub-sec. (7)  of Sec.  63 provides  that for  obtaining such a  permit as envisaged therein which enables the holder of such  a permit to ply vehicle as a tourist vehicle in the whole of  India has  to make  an application  to  the  State Transport Authority constituted for the State under Sec. 44. The underlying  object for creating this new class of permit was to  promote tourism.  If a tourist vehicle is hired by a tourist party  for moving  from State  to State, the vehicle cannot  be   taken  to  another  State  from  the  place  of commencement of  journey unless  a valid  contract  carriage permit of  that State  is obtained or the existing permit is counter-signed.   This    would   impede   tourism   causing inconvenience to  the  tourists.  To  remove  this  barrier, Parliament introduced  sub-sec. (7)  in Sec. 63 envisaging a new kind  of permit  to be  granted by  the State  Transport Authority of  the State  within the  prescribed quota  which would enable  the, holder  of the  permit to ply the tourist vehicle in  the whole  or any part of India. The  impediment in the  free flow  of  tourist  traffic  was  sought  to  be suitably removed by this provision.      Sub-sec. (7)  of  Sec.  63  further  provided  that  an application for  such a  permit has  to be made to the State Transport Authority  from whom  the permit  is sought  to be obtained. The  State Transport  Authority has to process the application in the manner prescribed in the sections set out in sub-s.(7), which amongst others includes Sec. 49. Sec. 49 provides for  making an  application for a contract carriage permit. Therefore,  an all-India tourist permit is primarily a contract  carriage permit  but while the ordinary contract carriage permit  can be  granted by  the Regional  Transport Authority, for  operation within local jurisdiction, or when countersigned by  Regional Transport  Authority of  adjacent area in  more than that one such jurisdiction but not at any rate outside  the State  and not in any case on an all-India basis. To  this extent, an ordinary contract carriage permit differs from  an all-India  tourist permit  but an all-India tourist permit  is none-the-less a contract carriage permit. Sec.  50   prescribes  the   procedure  for   processing  an application for  contract carriage  permit. Sec.  51 confers power on  the Regional Transport Authority to grant contract carriage permit.  Sub-s. (7)  of Sec.  63 on  the other hand confers power  on the  State Transport Authority to grant an all-India tourist  permit which  in  effect  is  a  contract carriage permit  but which permits plying of tourist vehicle throughout India.  Even for obtaining such a permit, Sec. 51 will apply  with this  modification that the application for all-India tourist  permit has  to be made to State Transport Authority of  the State  in which the permit is sought. Such an application may be further 8 processed according  to the  provision contained  in Sec. 57 which prescribes procedure for applying and granting permit. Sec. 58  prescribes duration  of a permit and renewal of it. Sec.  59  sets  out  general  conditions  attaching  to  all permits. Sec.  59-A prescribes general form of permits. Sec. 60 confers  power on  the authority  granting the  permit to cancel  or   suspend  permits.  Sec.  61  makes  the  permit heritable on  the death  of the  holder and Sec. 64 provides for appeals  against the  orders of  the Regional  Transport Authority and  the State Transport Authority. An Application for an  all-India tourist  permit has  to  be  processed  in accordance with  provisions contained  in sections  set  out herein above.      A resume of the relevant provisions and a brief outline

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

of the  Scheme of  the Act  sheds light on the concept of an all-India  tourist   permit.  This  scheme  of  law  nowhere expressly or  by  necessary  implication  suggests  that  an applicant for  an all-India tourist permit must of necessity or as  a pre-requisite have a contract carriage permit which alone  can   be  endorsed   for  the  purpose  of  all-India operation. Sub-s.(7)  of Sec.  63, if read thus would render nugatory  the   affirmative  provision   that  on  a  proper application being  made and  legally  processed,  the  State Transport Authority  can grant  an all-India tourist permit. If sub-s.  (7) of Sec. 63 is read as interpreted by the High Court, one will have to redraft the section to read that the holder of  a contract  carriage permit may apply for an all- India tourist  permit. There  is no  warrant for reading the section like  this. Undoubtedly,  an application for an all- India tourist  permit has  to be  made under  Sec. 49  which prescribes  procedure  for  obtaining  a  contract  carriage permit This ought to be so because in substance an all-India tourist permit  is none-the-less  a contract carriage permit but with  a much wider area of operation. That however, does not permit  an inference  that before obtaining an all India tourist  permit,   the  intending  operator  must  obtain  a contract  carriage   permit  from   the  Regional  Transport Authority and  then get it endorsed from the State Transport Authority to  make it  valid for  the whole  or any  part of India.  Sub-s.  (7)  of  Sec.  63  does  not  speak  of  any endorsement on  permit. It  speaks  of  granting  a  permit. Endorsement may  be another  mode of  enlarging the  area of Operational But  that is  not contemplated  by sub-s. (7) of Sec. 63.  It speaks of granting a permit valid for the whole or any  part of  India When  granted by  a  State  Transport Authority in exercise of the power conferred by Sub Sec. (7) of Sec.  63 without  any further  endorsement of  any  other authority. Therefore,  with respect,  the High Court was not right in observing that ’it is clear from the 9 aforesaid provision  of the  rules and  Schedule I  that  an holder of  a   permit issued  in the  State in relation to a motor cab  or an  omnibus is  only competent to apply to the State Transport  Authority for endorsement on that permit to the effect that the vehicle to which the permit relates is a tourist vehicle.’  There is  nothing in sub-s. (7) of Sec 63 to warrant  this construction.  The High Court unfortunately did not  look at the substantive provision enacted in sub-s. (7) of  Sec. 63,  did not  analyse it to ascertain its width and content  but merely  referred to  rules which  would  be presently  shown  to  be  not  applicable  and  reached  the conclusion on  the meaning  of sub-s. (7) of Sec. 63 without reference to it.      The High  Court referred  to sub. cls. (2), (3) and (4) of Rule  3 of  1967 Rules. Rule 3 confers power on the State Transport Authority  to endorse  any permit  granted in  the State in  relation to any motor cab or omnibus to the effect that the vehicle to which the permit relates is an all-India tourist vehicle.  Sub-rule (2) provides that ’any person who holds a  permit issued  in the  State in relation to a motor cab or  an omnibus  may apply  in  the  forms  specified  in Schedule  I,   to  the  State  Transport  Authority  for  an endorsement on  the permit to the effect that the vehicle to which the permit relates is a tourist vehicle.’ Sub-rule (3) provides that  an application  under sub-rule  (2) shall  be made in  the manner  provided therein  and within  the  time limit prescribed  therein. Sub-rule  (4)  provides  for  the procedure before  granting the necessary endorsement. Having referred to  these three sub-rules, the High Court held that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

there must,  be  a  pre-existing  contract  carriage  permit granted  in   the  State   which  alone   can  be   endorsed subsequently as  an all-India  tourist permit.  These  rules were enacted in the year 1967 and were put into operation on 19/20 June,  1967. They  were   enacted in  exercise of  the power conferred  by Sec.  68 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Sec. 68 confers  powers on  a State  Government to make rules for the purpose  of giving  effect to  the provisions of Chapter IV. These  rules were  made at  a time  when the only way to enlarge the  area of  operation in  respect of  a permit was endorsement by  various authorities  on the  original permit granted by  a Transport  Authority. All-India tourist permit was not  conceptualised by  the time 1967 Rules were framed. All-India tourist  permit as  contemplated by  sub-s. (7) of Sec. 63  was not  on the statute book at the time when these rules were  enacted. Therefore,  the rules  at the  relevant time caters to a situation when the area of operation 10 specified in a contract carriage permit could be enlarged by endorsement by authority other than The grantor. The concept of all-India  tourist permit  without any  necessity of  any endorsement by any authority save and except the grantor was then not  known to  law. In  order to  avoid endorsements by various authorities  so as  to enlarge the area of operation of a  contract carriage  permit and  with avowed  object  of facilitating unimpeded  free from  of tourist  traffic,  the concept of  all-India tourist  permit  was  introduced  with effect from  October 1,  1970. It also introduced a new type of vehicle  specified as tourist vehicle. The aforementioned rules enacted  in June 1967 when an all-India tourist permit not necessitating  any endorsement  save the  grant of it by the State  Transport Authority  and the concept of a tourist vehicle were  foreign to  the Motor  Vehicles Act  cannot be held to  apply unless a provision to that effect was made in the substantive  enactment conferring  power  on  the  State Transport Authority  to grant  an all-India  tourist  permit which needs  no endorsement  for operation throughout India. One cannot  read the concept of endorsement envisaged in the 1967 Rules  in respect of a permit that can be granted as an all-India tourist  permit under  sub-s.(7) of Sec. 63 of the Act by  insisting upon,  as per  the scheme  of rules a pre- existing  contract   carriage  permit  which  alone  can  be endorsed. Therefore the conclusion is inescapable that these rules were  not  at  all  attracted  while  considering  the applications  for  all-India  tourist  permit  made  by  the appellants under sub-s. (7) of Sec. 63.      The High  Court with  respect fell  into another  error when it  failed to  take notice of the  advertisement issued by the  State Transport  Authority on June 24, 1974 inviting applications for  permits in  respect of omnibus authorising it to  ply as an all-India tourist vehicle in the prescribed form.   Two   prescribed   forms   were   annexed   to   the advertisement. The  High Court overlooked the first form and only took  notice of  the second  form. The  first form  was meant for those who had no existing contract carriage permit and were applying straightway for the first time for an all- India  tourist  permit.  The  form  itself  shows  that  the application had  to be made to the State Transport Authority for a  contract carriage permit with an all-India operation. There was  another form  which catered  to the  needs of the holder of  the existing contract carriage permits who wanted the area  of operation  to  be  enlarged  by  converting  an ordinary contract  carriage permit  into  all-India  tourist permit. After  referring  to the second form, the High Court found fault with the applica

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9  

11 tions made  by the present appellants by observing that some of the  columns were left blank. For a . fresh applicant who had no  existing contract  carriage permit, the blanks could not have  been filled  in. This is another unfortunate error in which  the High  Court fell  while  granting  a  writ  of certiorari quashing  the  order  under  which  permits  were granted to the applicants.      Having thus examined the various aspects which appealed to the  High Court  in reversing  the decision granting all- India tourist  permit to  the  appellants,  we  are  of  the opinion that  none of them can be sustained. Firstly, it was not necessary  that the  applicants for an all-India tourist permit must  have a  pre-existing contract  carriage  permit which alone  could be  endorsed so  as to convert it into an all-India tourist  permit. Secondly, the applications of the appellants for  all relevant  information were  complete and the blanks were irrelevant and lastly sub-rules (2), (3) and (4)  of   Rule  3  had  absolutely  no  application  to  the proceedings  of  the  State  Transport  Authority  held  for consideration of  applications for  all-India tourist permit and granting  them to the appellants. These were the grounds on which  the High  Court reversed the decision of the State Transport  Authority   and  the  State  Transport  Appellate Tribunal. But  as these  reasons  are  unsustainable,  these appeals will  have to  be allowed.  Accordingly these  three appeals are  allowed and  the judgment  of the High Court is quashed  and  set  aside  and  the  decision  of  the  State Transport Authority  granting all-India  tourist permits  to the appellants is restored.      As the  appellants surrendered  their all-India tourist permits when  they lost  in the  High Court  and they  plied their vehicles on temporary permits, it must be held that if the duration  of the original permits has expired, they have to make a fresh application for all-India tourist permit but in that  event they  will be  treated  as  applications  for renewal of  all-India tourist permit as contemplated by Sec. 58 of the Act and not as fresh applications under Sec. 63(7) read with  Sec. 49. the appeals are accordingly allowed with no order as to costs. S.R.                                        Appeals allowed. 12