GAJRAJ SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

GAJRAJ SINGH AND ORS. versus STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

Approval of the scheme for 38 routes without hearing objections violated the valuable statutory right to be heard; only Saharanpur-Shahdra-Delhi route was covered by previous Supreme Court directions. Hearing of objections for the 38 routes is mandated; status quo maintained pending disposal.

Parties
Appellants: Gajraj Singh and Ors.; Respondents: State of U.P. and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Disposition
Outcome
appeal allowed regarding 38 routes; impugned High Court judgment set aside; writ petitions partly allowed
Legal Topics
Nationalisation of Routes, Right to Hearing, Public Transport Schemes, Reasonable Restrictions, Procedural Requirements Under Motor Vehicles Act
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Transport Law Nationalisation of Routes Right to Hearing Public Transport Schemes Reasonable Restrictions Procedural Requirements Under Motor Vehicles Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gajraj Singh and Ors.

Appellants

State of U.P. and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether approval of nationalisation scheme for 38 routes (besides Saharanpur-Shahdra-Delhi) without hearing objections violates statutory rights.
  2. 2 Whether Supreme Court's prior directions precluded hearing on these routes.
  3. 3 Whether procedural requirements under Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and 1988 were followed for hearing objections.

Ratio Decidendi

Approval of the scheme for 38 routes without hearing objections violated the valuable statutory right to be heard; only Saharanpur-Shahdra-Delhi route was covered by previous Supreme Court directions. Hearing of objections for the 38 routes is mandated; status quo maintained pending disposal.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed regarding 38 routes; impugned High Court judgment set aside; writ petitions partly allowed

Orders

  • Competent authority must hear and dispose of objections relating to 38 routes on merits and in accordance with law.
  • Only objections filed within 30 days of publication of draft scheme and maintainable under Section 68-D (1939 Act) read with Section 100(2) (1988 Act) shall be heard.