Section 104: Restriction on grant of permits in respect of a notified area or notified route

Motor Vehicles Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1988

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 104

Section 104 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 imposes a categorical statutory embargo prohibiting Transport Authorities from granting or renewing any private carriage permits in respect of a notified area or route except in strict accordance with an approved scheme, permitting temporary private permits only when the STU has omitted to apply.

  • Absolute Statutory Embargo on Private Permits: Once a scheme is published under Section 100(3), the STA and RTA are legally prohibited from granting any permit to private operators across the notified area or route except as expressly provided by the scheme itself.
  • Exclusionary Monopoly of Approved Schemes: Establishes a statutory public monopoly in favour of the STU, invalidating any corridor permissions, inter-regional permits, or overlapping extensions that breach the exclusivity of the nationalization scheme.
  • Conditional and Defeasible Temporary Permits: The proviso permits the grant of temporary permits to private operators solely where the STU has failed to apply for permits to operate the notified sector; such temporary permits automatically cease to be effective the moment a permit is issued to the STU.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Adarsh Travels Bus Service v. State of U.P. (1985) 4 SCC 557 (Constitution Bench): The Constitution Bench held that where a route is nationalized with complete exclusion of private operators, no private operator can ply on any part of the notified route even for an overlapping portion or under the guise of an inter-regional permit; the statutory prohibition under Section 104 is absolute and total.
  • Karnataka State Road Transport Corp. v. Ashrafulla Khan (2002) 2 SCC 560: The Supreme Court reaffirmed the Constitution Bench ruling in Adarsh Travels, holding that RTAs have no jurisdiction to grant temporary or renewed permits under Section 104 over nationalized sectors; any private permit violating the approved scheme is null and void.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In transport litigation, use Section 104 r/w Adarsh Travels to challenge any back-door permits granted to private operators on nationalized trunk routes under the pretext of 'corridor protection' or 'overlapping segments'. For private operators holding temporary permits under the proviso, continuously track STU fleet filings, as issuance of an STU permit causes instantaneous statutory termination of the temporary permit.