Facts of the Case

This is not a GST case, though the judgment does mention GST evasion in passing. The petitioners — the Jaipur Purchoon Transport Union and its president — challenged a notification dated 27.07.2022 issued by the Rajasthan Transport and Road Safety Department introducing 'The Rajasthan Transportation of Merchandise Goods in Stage Carriage and Contract Carriage Buses Scheme, 2022', framed under Section 67(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The petitioners contended that the Scheme, which permits carriage of merchandise goods in passenger buses subject to conditions (weight limits, e-way bill compliance, safety of passengers, etc.), was beyond the State Government's rule-making power under Section 67(3), had no nexus with the objects of that provision, and was violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution insofar as it affected the business interests of goods-carriage (truck) operators.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether Section 67(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 empowered the State Government to frame a scheme regulating carriage of merchandise goods in stage and contract carriage buses.
  2. Whether the Scheme of 2022 was arbitrary or without nexus to the objects of Section 67(3).
  3. Whether the Scheme violated Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution by affecting the trade interests of goods-carriage operators.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • A scheme for transportation of merchandise goods in contract and stage carriage buses could not be framed under Section 67(3), since the exclusive power to regulate use and fare/freight of such buses rests with Section 67(2).
  • The Scheme of 2022 had no nexus with the objects listed in clauses (a) to (m) of Section 67(3).
  • Allowing merchandise transport in passenger buses compromised passenger safety, security and comfort.
  • The Scheme violated Article 19(1)(g) by adversely affecting the business of goods-carriage (truck) operators.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Scheme of 2022 was consistent with the object of Section 67(3) and was issued with due legal authority.
  • Corresponding amendments to the Rajasthan Motor Vehicle Rules had introduced adequate checks and balances (weight limits, packing and safety requirements, refresher training for drivers, etc.) to make the Scheme workable and safe.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that Section 67(3) is a distinct and independent power, not confined by Section 67(2), and empowers the State Government to formulate schemes for transportation of goods and passengers and to modify permits/licences accordingly.
  • The Scheme of 2022, read with the accompanying amendments to the Rajasthan Motor Vehicle Rules, incorporated sufficient safeguards (weight caps of 10% of laden weight, mandatory packing/securing of goods, unobstructed entry/exit, e-way bill compliance) to protect passenger comfort and safety.
  • The Article 19(1)(g) challenge was rejected, since the checks and balances built into the Scheme did not hinder truck operators' right to carry on trade — they merely regulated the manner of merchandise transport in passenger buses.
  • In upholding the permit/licence framework, the Court noted, as one incidental observation, that requiring permits/licences for such transport (with e-way bill compliance) would also help the State protect its revenue by curbing GST evasion — this was mentioned as a benefit of the regulatory framework, not as an interpretation of any GST provision.
  • The writ petition was accordingly dismissed as devoid of merit.

Important Clarification

Despite the reference to 'curbing evasion of GST' in the judgment, this case does not decide any question of GST law, procedure, or liability. It is fundamentally a Motor Vehicles Act case about the State Government's rule-making power under Section 67(3) to regulate carriage of merchandise in passenger buses. The GST reference is incidental — cited only as one benefit flowing from the e-way bill and permit requirements built into the Scheme.

Sections Involved

  • Section 67 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (power of State Government to control road transport)
  • Rules 5.21, 5.22 and 2.18A of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicle Rules, 1990/2021
  • Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, 1950

Decision – In Favour of

Decided in favour of the State — the writ petition challenging the Scheme of 2022 was dismissed, and the Scheme was upheld as validly framed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur
Case No.: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12353/2022
Neutral Citation: [2023:RJ-JP:27480-DB]
Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice Augustine George Masih and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sameer Jain
Date of Order: 04.10.2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.