https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177952 The Motor Vehicles Act was construed to allow the State Transport Authority to perform Regional Transport Authority duties only in the contingencies stated in section 44(3)(b), and the saving clause was read as applying only where there is an express statutory bar. However, the State Transport Authority remained bound by valid directions issued by the State Government under section 43, and could not resolve inconsistently with them. Because the relevant direction left the inter-state permit function with the Regional Transport Authority, the later resolution was ineffective to displace that mandate. The permit application had therefore to be considered in accordance with the statutory direction, not the conflicting resolution. en-us Wed, 09 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:08:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177952 The Motor Vehicles Act was construed to allow the State Transport Authority to perform Regional Transport Authority duties only in the contingencies stated in section 44(3)(b), and the saving clause was read as applying only where there is an express statutory bar. However, the State Transport Authority remained bound by valid directions issued by the State Government under section 43, and could not resolve inconsistently with them. Because the relevant direction left the inter-state permit function with the Regional Transport Authority, the later resolution was ineffective to displace that mandate. The permit application had therefore to be considered in accordance with the statutory direction, not the conflicting resolution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177952