HC directs RTO to consider case of Bus Operators in Kargil

Excelsior Correspondent

SRINAGAR, June 19 : High Court directed the Regional Transport Officer (RTO) Ladakh to consider the case of Bus Operators of Kargil for replacement of vehicles by new vehicles strictly under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act.
The Kargil Bus Operators Cooperative Association has approached the court seeking direction to the RTO Ladakh and other officials to adhere to the section 83 of the MV Act 2988 by allowing them to replace the vehicles covered by existing permits by the newly purchased vehicles.
The court of Justice Sanjeev Kumar has issued notice to Commissioner Secretary Transport Leh, Inspector General of Police Ladakh, RTO Ladakh and ARTO Leh for objections. The notice has been waived and accepted on behalf of these officials by the Assistant Solicitor General of India (ASGI). He has sought four weeks time to reply to the plea of the Operators.
Meanwhile, Court directed RTO Ladakh to consider the case of Bus Operators strictly as per Section 83 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1983, provided the requisites for applicability of Section 83 of M. V. Act, are complete by the Bus Operators.
The officials after recognizing the Ladakh as separate UT in the year 2019 whereunder powers have been delegated to RTO Ladakh to replace the abbreviation of vehicles with ‘JK’ into ‘LA”. The petitioner association contends that they have approached the RTO for replacement of their vehicles covered by the existing route permits by another vehicles under section 83 of MV Act and in terms of the Act the officials are duty bound to replace the vehicles for the same route permit and renew the same on the same terms and conditions.
Court has been informed that the authorities are  not permitting them to replace their existing vehicles with the new vehicles based on same route permits resulting in defeating the essence of section 83 of the Act.
The petitioner-Operators being concerned with clause 2 (3) of the order of Commissioner Transport and renewal of permits issued by him approached the court and the court on consideration of the matter passed an interim order by directing the authorities not to change the conditions of route permit of the petitioner-Operators.
The Bus Operators submit that action of the authorities by not permitting them to replace the existing vehicles covered by the permit by the newly purchased vehicles is violative of fundamental rights as they have no other source of income other than the plying of the vehicles on the permitted route.