Lorry Broker Union Association Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- constitution of india. articles 12 & 226: [m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j., narendra nath tiwari & d.p.singh, jj] writ petition - maintainability - whether state co-operative milk producers federation ltd., is a state within meaning of article 12 ? - held, from perusal of relevant rules of byelaws, it is clear that state government has no role to play either in policy decision for raising funds for federation or its expenditure and thus have no financial control. further there is nothing to indicate that government has any functional and administrative control over federation. state government has no role to play in matter of appointment of any of officials of federation including managing director. federation is totally independent in all respects and in no way subservient to state government in conduct of its business. federation in no way can be termed as agency of state government and does not come within meaning of article 12 of constitution. writ petitions against federation is not maintainable. r.k. merathia, j.1. heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. petitioners have challenged the action of the district transport officer, dhanbad, by which the offices of petitioners nos. 2 to 6, who are said to be members of petitioner no. 1, were sealed on 17.4.1998 on the alleged violation of section 93 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (the act for short). they have further challenged the notices issued to them (annexure-1 series), by which they were directed to file affidavit regarding compliance of the said provision. petitioners have also prayed for declaration that the members of petitioner no. 1-association and petitioner nos. 2 to 6 cannot be coerced to take out a license under the said provision.3. petitioner's contention is that they settle the hire charges between the goods transporters, and the persons who intend to transport the goods. they cannot be said to be agent in the business of collecting, forwarding or distributing goods carried by goods carriages as contemplated under section 93(1)(ii) of the act. petitioner's further contention is that no notice whatsoever was given to them before taking such action.4. on their own showing, petitioners are agents between the persons intending to transport their goods and the persons transporting such goods. such transaction includes collecting, forwarding or distributing goods carried by goods carriages. petitioners are engaged in such agency business. in such circumstances, petitioners are required to take license under the said provisions. section 93 of the m.v. act and rules 102 to 112 of the bihar motor vehicles act, are made with some purpose.5. mr. sen admitted that under the interim order dated 19.5.1998, the office premises of the petitioners were unsealed.6. in the circumstances, the members of petitioner no, 1 and petitioner nos. 2 to 6 will apply for such license before the district transport officer, dhanbad within four weeks from today. such application will be disposed of by the said authority in accordance with law, within six weeks from the date of receipt of such applications.7. with these observations and directions this writ petition is dismissed. no costs.