JUDGMENT H.N. Sethi J. - This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, has been filed by 17 operators who have been granted public carrier permits, for plying their vehicles throughout the Sate of U. P. by the Regional Transport Authority of Agra, Meerut, Kanpur and Allahabad. For plying their vehicles in the State of U. P., the petitioners have paid all the taxes due from them under the Motor Vehicles Act, Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and U. P. Motor Gadi Malkar Adhiniyam, 1964. In the course of their trade, the petitioners ply their vehicles on inter-statal routes as well, and for that purpose they obtain temporary permits from the transport Authorities concerned after paying taxes prescribed by the other States in whose territories their vehicles are proposed to be used. At the time of issuing temporary permits, which enable the petitioners to ply their public Carriers on inter-statal routes, the Regional Transport Authorities concerned insist that they should further pay additional tax at the rate of Rs. 3/- per day per vehicle, as laid down in the second proviso to Art. VIII of Schedule I to the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (U. P. Act V of 1935). Such a demand is, according to the petitioners, wholly unjustified. They, accordingly. filed the present petition before this Court inter alia for a direction that the respondents be directed not to realise the aforesaid additional tax under U. P. Act V of 1935 from the petitioners. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court, the respondents relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Niyamat Ullah v. The Regional Transport Officer, Allahabad, Sp. A. No. 795 of 1970, decided on 16th of March, 1973, in support of their contention that the Additional Tax at the rate of Rs. 3/- per day per vehicle was payable by the petitioners in respect of temporary contract carriage permits obtained by them for plying their vehicles on the inter-stated route, as provided in Art. VIII of the 1st Schedule of the U. P., Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. The Division Bench which heard the writ petition felt that aforesaid decision of this Court required further consideration and referred the following question to a larger Bench. The Division Bench which heard the writ petition felt that aforesaid decision of this Court required further consideration and referred the following question to a larger Bench. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the petitioners were liable to pay an additional tax under Art. VIII of the I Schedule of the U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act in respect of temporary permits obtained by them for transporting goods from this State to another State ?" This is how the matter has come up he has come up before us. 3. The U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act of 1935 (U. P. Act No. V of 1935) has been enacted with the object of providing for the imposition of tax on motor vehicle in the United Provinces-now known as state of Uttar Pradesh. Sub-sec. (i) of Section 4 of the Act provides that save as otherwise provided in the Act, or by the Rules framed thereunder, or by any other law for the time being in force, no motor vehicle is to be used in any public place in U. P., unless the owner thereof has paid in respect of it tax at the appropriate rate specified in the I Schedule to the Act, within the time allowed by Section 5 and save as specified the subsequent provisions of the Act such tax is payable annually notwithstanding that the Motor Vehicles may from time to time cease to be used. Sub-sec. (2) of Section 4 then provides that for determining the amount of tax payable in respect of transport Vehicles under Arts. IV to VII or IX of the I Schedule of the Act, all routes in Uttar Pradesh are to be classified by the Prescribed Authority as special route or ordinary route and every ordinary route has to be further classified as an A class route or B class route or C class route. Part A to the I Schedule provides for the rate of tax payable by various vehicles other than transport vehicles and Part B which consists of Arts. IV to IX provides for annual tax payable by Transport Vehicles, Arts. VI and VI-A provide for tax payable by vehicles plying for transport of goods only. It is not disputed that the tax payable under Arts. IV to IX provides for annual tax payable by Transport Vehicles, Arts. VI and VI-A provide for tax payable by vehicles plying for transport of goods only. It is not disputed that the tax payable under Arts. VI and VI-A read along with Art. V-II has been paid by the petitioners, and the controversy with regard to it is not the subject-matter of the question which has been referred to this Bench. Art. VII which provides for an additional tax to be paid by vehicles plying for hire runs thus:- "Vehicles plying for hire in respect of which a tax has been paid under any of the Arts. IV, V, VI, or VII when intended for use in special or temporary circumstances and for a limited period on a route or routes other than those over which they otherwise ply in addition to any tax paid under any of the foregoing' Articles, a tax at such daily rate not exceeding Rs. 3/- as the Stale Government may prescribe, for every day or part thereof during which it is intended to use any such vehicle in such special or temporary circumstances: Provided that nothing in this article shall apply to a motor vehicle which is temporarily the subject of a private hiring agreement for the purpose of specific journey : Provided further that no additional tax shall be payable if a motor vehicle does not use the road or roads for which it is permanently licenced during the period it is temporarily allowed to ply on a route or routes other than those in respect of which it is permanently licensed." 4. The expression route has been defined in Section 2(i) as meaning a road or roads or part of a road or roads over which the transport vehicles may be authorised to travel under a permit issued under the Motor Vehicles Act. Learned counsel for the respondents urged that in this case the petitioners have been authorised to ply their vehicles on all routes in the State of U. P., accordingly, they are liable to pay tax and have paid such tax under Arts. VI and VI-A and VII of the I Schedule to the Act. Whenever they apply for grant of temporary permits for plying their vehicles on inter-stated routes. VI and VI-A and VII of the I Schedule to the Act. Whenever they apply for grant of temporary permits for plying their vehicles on inter-stated routes. they pray for a temporary permit for using their vehicles on routes (as defined in the Act), other than those over which they otherwise ply. Accordingly, as required by Art. VIII they are liable to pay, in addition to any tax paid under Art. VI, VI-A and VII of the schedule, a tax at the rate of Rs. 3/- for every day or part thereof during which they intend to use their vehicle in such temporary or special circumstances.. In support of this contention, he relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Niyamat Ullah v. Regional Transport Officer, Allahabad, 1970 A. L. J. 1211. In that case the operators held permanent permit for the whole of U. P. excepting Kumaon Region and obtained temporary permits for a route which was partly outside Uttar Pradesh. Learned counsel for the operators urged that in as much as the portion of the route which lay within the State of Uttar Pradesh was fully covered by the permanent permits already issued to them, it could not be said that under the temporary permits issued to them, they were to ply their vehicles on a route different from that over which they normally plied their vehicles. This Court repelled the plea and held that if the two termini of the journey proposed to be undertaken are different from that of the route for which the permanent permit had been issued, the case would fell within Act. VIII. 5. Section 4 of the U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1935 provides for payment of tax on the use of vehicle in any public place in U. P. It does not authorise the levy and imposition of tax on the use of motor vehicles at any place outside the State of U. P. Further Sub-sec. (2) provides that for purposes of determining the amount of tax payable in respect of transport vehicles, under Arts. VI, VII or IX of the I Schedule, the routes in U. P. have to be classified by the prescribed authority and the tax mentioned in Schedule I becomes payable for the use Motor Vehicles according to the class of the route on which the motor vehicle is permitted to ply. VI, VII or IX of the I Schedule, the routes in U. P. have to be classified by the prescribed authority and the tax mentioned in Schedule I becomes payable for the use Motor Vehicles according to the class of the route on which the motor vehicle is permitted to ply. The prescribed authority has not been given any power to classify any route or a part thereof which lies outside the State of U. P Schedule I has to be read in the light of the provisions contained in Section 4 of the Act. Read in this manner, Art. VIII which provides for payment of additional tax becomes applicable only when it is intended to use, vehicles plying for hire and in respect of which tax has been paid under Arts. IV, V, VI or VII, in special or temporary circumstances and for a limited period. On a route or routes in the State of U. P other than that over which they otherwise ply. If under a temporary permit, a vehicle has been permitted to be used over any portion of road or roads outside U. P. as well, such permission cannot be equated with an authorisation to use the vehicle on some route in U. P. which is different from that for which it was already authorised to ply under the permanent permit issued in respect of it, and no additional tax under Art VIII would be payable therefor. As stated earlier, in this case the petitioners are, under the permanent permits obtained by them, entitled to use their vehicles throughout the State of U. P. When they obtain temporary permits to use their vehicles on inter-stated route, in effect they obtain permits which authorises them to use their vehicles outside U. P. Accordingly, in substance, when the respondents insist that the petitioners should pay additional tax under Art. VIII, they require the petitioners to pay tax for using their vehicles outside U. P. which they are not authorised to do under Section 4 of the U. P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1935. 6. It appears that in Special Appeal No. 795 of 1970 (supra), the aforesaid aspect of the case was not brought to the notice of the Bench concerned. 6. It appears that in Special Appeal No. 795 of 1970 (supra), the aforesaid aspect of the case was not brought to the notice of the Bench concerned. Only question raised and considered by the Bench was whether the route for which the temporary permit had been obtained by the operators in that case was different from the routes for which the petitioners were authorised to ply their vehicles under the permits issued to them. As per literal interpretation of the definition of the expression `route', as contained in Section 2(i) this argument was rightly repelled by the. Division Bench. However, in as much as Section 4 of the U. P. Motor Vehicle.; Taxation Act, 1935 does not permit the levy and collection of tax for use of a motor vehicle at a place outside U. P. and that Art. VIII of the I Schedule applies only when a motor vehicle which plies for hire is intended to be used in special or temporary circumstances for a limited period on a row or routes in the State of U. P. other than that over which it otherwise plies. the ultimate decision arrived at in that case does not appear to be correct. 7. We accordingly answer question referred to us as follows : - 8. In the opinion of this Bench, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the petitioners are not liable to pay additional tax under Art. VIII of the I Schedule of the U. P. Motor for Vehicles Taxation Act in respect or the temporary permits obtained by them for transporting goods from this State to another State.