Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who are private bus operators, filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 05.05.2015 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru in R.P.Nos.40, 43, 46, 47, 48/2014 and R.P.Nos.44, 45/2014. The Tribunal had allowed review petitions filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) and the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) and set aside its earlier orders granting permits to the petitioners. The petitioners contended that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to review its own orders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The respondents argued that the Tribunal had inherent power to correct its own mistakes. The High Court examined the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and found that no power of review is conferred on the Tribunal. The Court held that the power to review is not an inherent power and must be expressly conferred by statute. The Tribunal's order was quashed as being without jurisdiction. The Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the impugned order.
Headnote
A) Motor Vehicles Act - Review - Jurisdiction of State Transport Appellate Tribunal - The State Transport Appellate Tribunal has no power to review its own orders as neither the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 nor the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 confer any power of review. The Tribunal's order dated 05.05.2015 in R.P.Nos.40, 43, 46, 47, 48/2014 and R.P.Nos.44, 45/2014 was quashed as being without jurisdiction. (Paras 1-10)
B) Motor Vehicles Act - Review - Distinction between Review and Recall - The power to review is not inherent and must be expressly conferred by statute. The Tribunal's reliance on the power to recall or correct clerical errors is misplaced as review is a distinct power. (Paras 1-10)
C) Motor Vehicles Act - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - The High Court can quash orders passed without jurisdiction by a Tribunal. The impugned order was set aside as the Tribunal acted in excess of its jurisdiction. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Transport Appellate Tribunal has the power to review its own orders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
Final Decision
The writ petitions are allowed. The order dated 05.05.2015 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in R.P.Nos.40, 43, 46, 47, 48/2014 and R.P.Nos.44, 45/2014 is quashed.
Law Points
- Review
- Jurisdiction
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1988
- Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules
- 1989
- Writ Jurisdiction
- Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
Case Details
2017 LawText (KAR) (04) 13
W.P.Nos.25243 – 25247/2015 c/w W.P.Nos.26263 – 26264/2015 (MV)
M.E. Nagesh, Thampan Thamson, N. Shanthakumar, Vijayakumar Y.H., Hareesh Bhandary T., P.C. Chacko
K.B. Vittal Rai, Nelson Pereira, Smt. E. Pereira, Smt. Shailini R. Jain, Gopala Krishna Shetty, K.B. Bala Krishna Rai
State Transport Authority, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowing review petitions.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the order dated 05.05.2015 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in R.P.Nos.40, 43, 46, 47, 48/2014 and R.P.Nos.44, 45/2014.
Filing Reason
The State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowed review petitions filed by the respondent corporations and set aside its earlier orders granting permits to the petitioners.
Previous Decisions
The State Transport Appellate Tribunal had earlier passed orders granting permits to the petitioners. The respondent corporations filed review petitions which were allowed by the impugned order dated 05.05.2015.
Issues
Whether the State Transport Appellate Tribunal has the power to review its own orders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the Tribunal has no power of review under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 or the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
Respondents argued that the Tribunal has inherent power to correct its own mistakes and that the review petitions were maintainable.
Ratio Decidendi
The State Transport Appellate Tribunal has no power to review its own orders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, as no power of review is conferred by the statute. The power to review is not inherent and must be expressly conferred.
Judgment Excerpts
The State Transport Appellate Tribunal has no power to review its own orders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
The power to review is not an inherent power and must be expressly conferred by statute.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 05.05.2015 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru in R.P.Nos.40, 43, 46, 47, 48/2014 and R.P.Nos.44, 45/2014. The High Court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 05.04.2017.
Acts & Sections
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
- Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989:
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
