Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a scheme published by the Rajasthan State Roadways for operating a motor transport service on the Jaipur-Kotah route, which faced objections from 61 private operators. The Legal Remembrancer heard the objections and initially rejected them, leading to the scheme's approval by the State Government. The High Court later quashed this approval, directing a rehearing of objections. After individual notices were sent to the operators, the Legal Remembrancer approved the scheme again, which led to the cancellation of the private operators' permits. The appellants challenged this in the Supreme Court, arguing that they were not properly notified and that their fundamental rights were infringed. The Supreme Court found that the appellants were duly served with notice and had the opportunity to present their objections. It ruled that the Legal Remembrancer's decision was based on evidence and did not rely solely on the presumption of service from the Gazette publication. The court concluded that the appellants' permits were lawfully cancelled, and thus their fundamental rights were not infringed, dismissing the appeal and writ petition with costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Notice of Hearing - Adequate Service of Notice - Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, Section 68D - The appellants contended that they were not adequately notified of the hearing regarding the transport scheme. The court held that the Legal Remembrancer had sufficient evidence to conclude that the appellants were duly served and had the opportunity to present their objections (Paras 99-100). B) Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights - Infringement of Right to Trade - Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, Section 42(1) - The appellants claimed that their right to carry on business was infringed by the State operating without permits. The court held that once the scheme was legally approved and published, the appellants' permits were lawfully cancelled, and thus no fundamental rights were infringed (Paras 101-112).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants were denied reasonable opportunity to be heard before the approval of the transport scheme and if their fundamental rights were infringed.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and writ petition, affirming the validity of the transport scheme and the cancellation of the appellants' permits, with costs awarded.
Law Points
- Motor Vehicles Act
- 1939
- Rajasthan State Road Transport Service (Development) Rules
- 1960
- fundamental rights
- cancellation of permits
- reasonable opportunity
