Road Transport Corporations Act Falls Under Union List, Special Appeals Against Regulation Framed Thereunder Are Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950 falls within the ambit of powers exercised under List I of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. Therefore, special appeals filed under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules arising out exercise of powers by a single judge under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India against an order passed by appellate/revisional authority under U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Employees (Other than Officers) Service Regulations, 1981 are maintainable. The full bench comprising of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali, Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Vikas Budhwar held “Applying the doctrine of pith and substance, we are of the considered opinion that the Act is referable to List 1 Entry 43 and 44. The power to legislate in relation to 'regulation of the corporations' under the aforesaid Entries, includes within its umbrella the regulation of its workforce. The same is essential part of incorporation and making functional any corporation and in ensuring its proper functioning. Merely because Section 45(2)(c) invests the Corporation with power to make Regulations, inter alia, concerning the conditions of appointment and service of its employees, would not bring the legislation within the ambit of List-III Item No. 22 or 24.” Factual Background U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (“UPSRTC”) has been constituted vide notification dated 31.5.1972 by the State Government, issued under Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporations Act, 1950. Appellant, a conductor, was removed from service against which he filed an appeal. Regional Manager, UPSRTC dismissed his appeal. Thereafter, appellant preferred a revision before the Chairman, UPSRTC, which was also dismissed. Against the termination, appellant approached the High Court. However, his writ petition was dismissed on grounds of alternate remedy. Subsequently, appellant filed a special appeal which listed before a division bench of the High Court. Relying on the judgment of a division bench of the Allahabad High Court in UPSRTC through RM vs. Abhai Raj Singh and 2 others, respondent questioned the maintainability of the special appeal. However, the appellant submitted that since power had been exercised under U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Employees (Other than Officers) Service Regulations, 1981 which had been framed under a Central Act, the appeal would be maintainable. Appellant relied on division bench decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Jageshwar Prasad Tiwari vs. UPSRTC and Others and Madan Pal Singh vs. State of U.P. and Others. Though the division bench hearing appellant's appeal believed that the judgment of its coordinate bench in Abhai Raj Singh proceeded on a wrong assumption that the legislation under which the orders were passed by the officers/authority, was a State Legislation, although it is a Central Legislation, the bench referred the matter to a larger bench for consideration. High Court Verdict The Full bench referred to a decision of its coordinate bench in Sheet Gupta vs. State of U.P., where the scope of special appeals against order of the single judge was clarified. It was held that special appeals against the orders of a single judge would not lie when the order was passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction, in respect of a decree or order made by a Court subject to the Superintendence of the Court, in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, criminal jurisdiction or in the exercise of the power of Superintendence of the High Court. Further, it was provided that a special would not lie where order is passed in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India in respect of any judgment, order or award by a Tribunal, Court or statutory arbitrator, when such order/ award has been made while exercising jurisdiction under any Uttar Pradesh Act or under any Central Act, with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List or the Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. Lastly, it was held that the special appeal shall not lie against, “the order made by one Judge in the exercise of jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India in respect of any judgment, order or award of (i) the Government or (ii) any officer or (iii) authority, made or purported to be made in the exercise or purported exercise of appellate or revisional jurisdiction under any such Act, i.e. under any Uttar Pradesh Act or under any Central Act, with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List or the Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.” The Court held that the Regional Manager, UPSRTC, acting as an appellate authority and the Chairman, UPSRTC, acting as the revisional authority derive their powers from the Regulations ...

Road Transport Corporations Act Falls Under Union List, Special Appeals Against Regulation Framed Thereunder Are Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

Tags