What is wrong if pvt buses are allowed to run along with RTC buses?, Telangana HC asks petitioner

HYDERABAD: The Telangana high court on Tuesday sought to know from those who are opposing the opening of the 5100 public routes to private transporters if they serve the intention of the legislature to effectively cater to the commuting needs of the people. The bench of chief justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and justice A Abhishek Reddy was hearing a public interest litigation petition filed by Professor P L Visweswara Rao of Telangana Jana Samithi questioning the decision of the state to invite private buses into routes that were hitherto known as RTC routes that too at a time when RTC workers are on strike.The timing is important, it is done in bad faith, said Chikkudu Prabhakar, the counsel for the petitioner.
“Forget about the strike. The central government had amended the motor vehicles Act and allowed the states to invite private buses into public routes. This will break the monopoly of RTC over these routes. The intention is to promote healthy competition between the state-run RTC and private buses. Show us what is wrong with it. How is it unlawful”, the bench asked. Petitioner’s counsel replied that the cabinet took the decision without consulting RTC and other affected parties though it is mandatory under section 102 of the MV Act for the state to do so. This section directs the state to notify the proposed opening of the routes through a gazette notification, publish it in regional media, invite objections from the affected parties and hold a hearing at a pre-announced venue to listen to the affected parties. Later the Road Transport Authority (RTA) would grant stage carriage permits to private persons. The bench summoned the Cabinet Resolution copy from Advocate General BS Prasad, who furnished it in a sealed cover to the bench because the state is claiming that this is a privileged document.
This is merely the intention of the state cabinet to initiate the process under section 102. Your (the petitioner’s) grievance can be justified if any of the steps enumerated under this section are violated. But that stage has not yet come. This is still at a preliminary stage”, the bench said. One route need not be read as one bus. There may be several buses, both RTC and private, in one route, the bench clarified asking the petitioner’s counsel not to confuse by mixing both.
The CJ told the counsel for the petitioner that the Indian state has been moving away from its avowed socialistic pattern of governance ever since it embraced liberalisation and globalisation in 1991. Even Supreme Court has been interpreting labour laws in tune with the changing times, he added. Breaking the monopoly of Air India over the sky, private aeroplanes were allowed on Indian skies. Some flourished and some like Kingfisher perished. It would be a misplaced argument if you contend that this would affect the people adversely, the CJ said. When a law was made by Parliament, courts cannot replace that wisdom with their opinions, he said. We have to move on. We cannot hold on to our 1947 socialistic pattern, the CJ said while adjourning the case to Wednesday.