Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1966Kant317; AIR1966Mys317; ILR1965KAR1167; (1966)1MysLJ72
Govinda Bhat, J.(1) This Writ Petition, preferred by an employee of the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation hereinafter called 'the Corporation' is directed against Resolution No. 436 dated 19th October, 1964 passed by the said Corporation. The petitioner has challenged the said resolution, hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned resolution' on the ground that it is the ultra vires of S. 45 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950(Central Act 64 of 1950) hereinafter called the 'Act'. This is the main ground on which the impugned resolution is repugnant to the directions dated 1st August, 1961 given by the State Government to respondent No. 2 under S. 34. In order to appreciate the contentions raised by the parties, it is necessary by briefly narrate the relevant facts which are not in dissolute. Petitioner was an employee in the Bombay State Road Transport Corporation and after formation of the new State as a Government employee on 1st January 1957. On 24th October 1959 the Sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC1364; (1966)ILLJ437SC; [1966]3SCR40
Satyanarayana Raju, J. 1. This appeal, by special leave, is against the judgment and order of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, dated May 28, 1963, dismissing in limine an application filed by the appellant under Art. 226 of the Constitution. 2. The facts material for the purposes of this appeal may be briefly stated. The appellant was a permanent employee of the State Transport Corporation, Gujarat, hereinafter referred to as the Corporation. At the material time he was employed as a Writer in the Visnagar Depot of the Corporation in Mahasana District. On January 15, 1962, the appellant applied to the Divisional Controller, State Transport, Mahasana, for leave for 15 days on the ground that he had to attend to his 'personal work'. On January 16, 1962, he was transferred from Visnagar to Ambaji where there was a vacancy in the office of the Depot Manager. On January 31, 1962, a formal order transferring the appellant from Visnagar to Ambaji was passed, and he was directed to join...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1967MP138
Bhave, J. 1. Jainarain (respondent No. 3) held a stage carriage permit on the route Indore to Alot via Ujjain Originally the permit was granted in the year 1956 and was renewed in 1961. He again, applied for renewal. The petitioner. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, applied for grant of a permit on the said route in lieu of renewal The Regional Transport Authority, Indore, by order, dated 23rd November 1964, rejected the application for renewal and granted the permit to the petitioner in the vacancy caused. On appeal, the State Transport Appellate Authority set aside the order of the Regional Transport Authority and granted renewal to the respondent No. 3 by order, dated 29th May 1965. The present petition is directed against the appellate order.2. The petitioner challenges the order of the State Transport Appellate Authority on the following grounds:(1) That the respondent No. 3 owns only three buses and has no properly equipped workshop. (2) That the respondent's reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1967MP130
Bhave, J. 1. This Order will also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petition No. 108 of 1966.2. The question raised by these two petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is as to the-validity of two Schemes described as Scheme No. 53 and Scheme No. 49 published by the State Government under Section 68D (3; of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 68C of the Act the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter called the Corporation) published in the Gazette, dated 12th February 1965. Scheme No. 53 for the running and operation by the Corporation of road transport services on the routes specified in the Scheme. On the same date, another Notification under Section 68C containing proposals propounding another Scheme, namely, Scheme No. 49, was published by the Corporation for the running and operation by the Corporation of services on the routes specified in that Scheme.These n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (1967)IILLJ132Kant; (1967)1MysLJ78
Somnath Ayyar, J.1. In these two petitions the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation is the petitioner. Respondent 2 in Writ Petition No. 1264 is an erstwhile employee of the Corporation. There are four persons in Writ Petition No. 1265 of 1964 who are the legal representatives of a deceased worker Subba Rao.2. Respondent 2 in the one case, and the legal representatives in the other, presented application to the labour court for retrenchment compensation under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Respondent 2 in Writ Petition No. 1264 of 1964 was awarded retrenchment compensation of Rs. 2,460. The legal representatives of Subba Rao were awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,620 after deducting what had already been paid. The Corporation calls in question these orders made by the labour court.3. It is undisputed that the two workers were employees of a company known as the Bangalore Transport Company whose undertaking was taken over by Government under the Bangalore Road Transpor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1967KAR988; (1970)ILLJ171Kant
Gopivallabha Ayyangar, J.1. This is a petition filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking the quashing of the show-cause notice issued by respondent 3 marked Ex. A dated 1/3 December, 1964 and bearing MST/ BTS/TRF/DFL/D4 : 479/3833. 2. The petitioner is a conductor of the erstwhile Bangalore Transport Company, Ltd. He appears to have been appointed prior to 1 October, 1956 when the State Government took over the entire undertaking of the Bangalore Transport Company, Ltd., under the provisions of Mysore Act 8 of 1956 which came into force on 27 September, 1956. By virtue of this Act all persons employed by that company and still employed immediately before 1 October, 1956, became as from that date, the employees of the Government of Mysore. Under the provisions of the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950, the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter called the Corporation) came into existence with effect from 1 August, 1961. The pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1968Kant69; AIR1968Mys69; [1968(17)FLR139]; (1967)1MysLJ609
Gopivallabha Iyengar, J.(1) This is a petition filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking the quashing of the show-cause notice issued by the third respondent, marked Ex. A dated 1/3-12-1964 and bearing MST/BTS/TRF/DFL/D4: 479/3833.(2) The petitioner is a conductor of the erstwhile Bangalore Transport Company, Limited. He appears to have been appointed prior to 1-10-1956 when the State Government took over the entire undertaking of the Bangalore Transport Company, Limited under the provisions of Mysore Act VIII of 1956 which came into force on the 27th of September 1956 By virtue of this Act, all persons employed by that Company and still employed immediately before 1-10-1956, became as from that date, the employees of the Government of Mysore. Under the provisions of the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950 the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter called the Corporation) came into existence with effect from 1-8-1961. The petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1815; 1968(16)BLJR159; [1967]3SCR329
Wanchoo, J. 1. These are two appeals on certificate granted by the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation), constituted under the Road Transport Corporation Act, (No. 64 of 1950), came into existence in May 1962 to operate as a State Transport Undertaking under s. 68-A of the Motor Vehicles Act No. 4 of 1939, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Corporation passed two resolutions in April and May 1964 by which it decided to take over certain routes under Chapter IV-A of the Act to the Exclusion of the existing private operators on those routes. Two schemes, namely, Nos. 16 and 22 dated May 11, 1964, were published by the Corporation inviting objections within 30 days. The schemes appeared in the Government Gazette of May 22, 1964 and objections thereto were filed by private operators affected thereby within the period prescribed. Thereafter the authority empowered to hear objections under s. 68-D of the Act gave notices fixing a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1968Raj169
ORDER Jaipur, April 16 1965.No. F. 1 (8) Jud-55-In pursuance of Section/Rule 7(1) of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Services (Development) Rules, 1960, the Governor is pleased to order that the Joint Legal Remembrancer to the Government of Rajasthan shall consider objections to, approval and modifications of the scheme under Section 68-D of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 (Central Act TV of 1939).This is in supersession to this Department order No. F. 12 (1) LJ/B/60. dated the 13th October 1960By order,Sohan Lal AgrawalSecretary to Govt.'8. The first attack of Mr. Jain about this notification it that under Rule 7 (1) of the Rules of 1960 the Governor could appoint an officer to dispose of the objections received under Section 68-D of the Act only under the Rules made by the Governor in pursuance of Clause (3) of Article 166 of the Constitution of India. In this connection Mr. Jain, further contended that the Rules of Business were amended by the Governor on 11-10-1960. where by a new ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1968SC464; (1968)IILLJ144SC; [1968]1SCR767
Bachawat, J.1. The respondent was a class III employee in the statistical department of the Mysore State Road Transport Corporation. In October 1961, he was temporarily promoted to act as statistical Superintendent at Hassan. On July 21, 1964, the General Manager of the Corporation issued a notice inviting applications for appointments to class II junior posts of (a) assistant/divisional statisticians and (b) labour welfare officers on a pay of Rs. 220 per month in the pay scale or Rs. 220 - 15 - 400 - EB - 20 - 500 plus the usual dearness and other allowances admissible under the Rules. On August 11 1964, the respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court at Mysore claiming that the Corporation had no power to issue the notice and praying for an order quashing it. The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the notice. The Corporation has filed this appeal by special leave. For the proper appreciation of the point in issue, it is necessary to read Sections 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(...
Tag this Judgment!