Approved transport scheme exclusivity bars private permit renewal where the route overlaps an excluded notified stretch.

An approved transport scheme under Chapter IV-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 must be given full effect where it grants the State Transport Undertaking exclusive operation on notified routes or excluded portions. A Regional Transport Authority cannot grant or renew a private permit that overlaps a notified route within the excluded area, even if the overlap is short or accompanied by a condition preventing boarding or alighting on that stretch. The operative effect is that overlap with the excluded route itself is impermissible, and renewal must be refused to the extent it conflicts with the scheme.

---

---

Issues: Whether a permit renewal for a private operator could be sustained where the route overlapped a notified route under the approved Bangalore Scheme, and whether such overlap could be ignored on the footing that it was only a short distance or was subject to a condition against picking up or setting down passengers on the notified route.

Analysis: The scheme under Chapter IV-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 authorized the State Transport Undertaking to operate specified routes to the complete exclusion of other operators. Once a route or part of a route is notified and the scheme excludes private operators, the Regional Transport Authority must give effect to the scheme and cannot grant or renew a private permit if it traverses the notified route or any excluded portion of it. The Court held that the statutory scheme does not permit an exception based on the small length of overlap, and that a condition restricting boarding or alighting on the overlapped portion does not cure the breach where the route itself is within the excluded area of the approved scheme.

Conclusion: The renewal of the private operator's permit could not be sustained, and the objection to the overlapping permit was entitled to succeed.

Final Conclusion: The majority held that the approved scheme must be given full effect according to its terms, so that a private permit overlapping an excluded notified route is impermissible and the transport authority must refuse renewal to the extent it conflicts with the scheme.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an approved transport scheme under Chapter IV-A grants the State Transport Undertaking exclusive operation on specified routes or portions thereof, the transport authority cannot renew or grant a private permit that overlaps the excluded route, and a short overlap or restrictive condition cannot override the statutory exclusion.

Dissenting Opinion: Beg, J. would have dismissed the appeal, taking the view that the Bangalore Scheme and the material on record did not clearly establish a blanket prohibition against the overlapping portion and that the challenge was too belated and inadequately pleaded to justify interference.

---