Judgment :- The orders under challenge in these petitions contain a prohibitory direction restraining the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority from issuing the permits on account of, what is called, "the diesel crisis". The counsel for the petitioners submit that there is no provision in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for short, The Act, empowering the Regional Transport Authorities to issue such a direction. 2. The learned Government Pleader on the other hand, contends that the Gulf war in its trail has brought about'the diesel crisis' and unless the distribution of this petroleum product is restricted, and such restriction could be had only by stopping the issue of new permits and also imposing restrictions on the sale of this petroleum product, a time would come when this petroleum product may not be available at all 3. It can be seen from these competing contentions that a question of public importance namely, whether the R.T.A. has the power to defer the issuance of a permit on the ground of 'diesel crisis', arises for consideration in these petitions. 4. The scheme of The Act requires to be considered to get an answer to this question. A reference in this connection to the statement of objects and reasons is profitable. One of the objects sought to be accomplished is this, namely "liberalised scheme for grant of stage carriage permits on non-Nationalised routes, All India tourist permits and also National permits for goods carriages". Here we are concerned only with the liberalised scheme for grant of stage carriage permits on non-Nationalised routes. It is axiomatic that to have the liberalised scheme brought into force, restrictions on the power of authorities who are empowered to implement the scheme shall be the minimal. The Parliament therefore in its wisdom has removed the restrictions that had been imposed by S.57 of the repealed Act, on the powers of the authorities concerned to issue a permit. To put it differently, in order to see that the travelling public get adequate travelling facilities, the Parliament has conferred power on these authorities to issue any number of permits for routes provided that such permits for routes of 50 Kms or less shall be granted only to individuals or State Transport undertakings. There are certain other restrictions which however, will not impede the power to issue permits freely for the benefit of the travelling public. There are certain other restrictions which however, will not impede the power to issue permits freely for the benefit of the travelling public. To put it differently, under the Act, it may perhaps be more difficult to pass an order refusing the grant of the permit. A reference in this connection to sub-sec. 2 of S.71 is profitable. It should be borne in mind that this is the one section which commands the R.T.A. to refuse to grant a stage carriage permit. This sub-section provides that the R.T.A. shall refuse to grant a stage carriage permit if it appears from any time table furnished that the provisions of this Act relating to the speed at which vehicle may be driven, are likely to be contravened. Even here the request for the permit shall not be refused unless it be that the applicant is not prepared to amend the time table so as to conform to the above provision. To put it pithily the R.T.A. shall not ordinarily refuse to grant an application for permit of any kind at any time under the Act. (vide sub-section 2 of S.80). There are two provisos to this sub-section. The first proviso states that the R.T.A. is empowered to summarily refuse an application if the grant of any permit in accordance with the application would have the effect of increasing the number of stage carriages as fixed and specified in the Notification in the Official Gazette under clause (1) of sub-section 3ofS.71. The second proviso makes it imperative that no order refusing the application for the grant of the permit shall be passed unless it be that the applicant has been informed of the reasons for the refusal of the application and an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 5. From the discussion above It is clear that the Parliament with a view to provide the travelling public with adequate travelling facilities has introduced a scheme, which is different from the scheme discernible from the repealed Act, liberalizing the grant of permit on non-Nationalised routes. In other words, by liberalizing the grant of permits the Parliament could take care of the greater flow of passenger with the least impediments so that islands of isolation are not created leading to regional or local imbalances. 6. In other words, by liberalizing the grant of permits the Parliament could take care of the greater flow of passenger with the least impediments so that islands of isolation are not created leading to regional or local imbalances. 6. It therefore follows that there shall be more stage carriages with permits to cater to the greater flow of passenger traffic. This can be accomplished only if the vehicles can be plied on the routes for which permits are granted. To ply vehicles incessantly, I do not think that even the counsel representing the petitioners would argue to the contra, supply of diesel in plenty is necessary. Any short supply of this petroleum product would result in the rejection of the travelling facilities, the public shall have. The authority which has been empowered by the Act to issue the permits, in my view, therefore can take into account the problems brought about by the 'diesel crisis' although on a reading of the relevant provisions such a power has not specifically been conferred on the authority. Has the R.T. A, under such circumstances, the power to impose restrictions as regards the grant or issue of the permits. It should in this connection be remembered that it is a fundamental principle that where a statute confers powers or duties in general terms, all the powers and duties incidental and necessary to make such restriction effective are included by implication. (See para.5402 of Sutherland-Statutory Construction, 3rd Edition, Vol.111). But before such power is found in the authority, the court must be satisfied that the existence of such power is absolute, indispensable for the discharge of the power conferred on the authority by the statute. That this principle has been adopted and applied in India is clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in I.T. Officer v. Mohd. Kunhi, AIR 1969 SC 430. (See also Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 11th edition, page 350, AIR 1983 SC 383, AIR 1970 SC 140, AIR 1972 SC 2563 and 1965 KLT 1055). This principle, in my view, squarely applies here in that unless such incidental power is found in these authorities, it may be difficult to administer the provisions of the enactment effectively. (See also Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 11th edition, page 350, AIR 1983 SC 383, AIR 1970 SC 140, AIR 1972 SC 2563 and 1965 KLT 1055). This principle, in my view, squarely applies here in that unless such incidental power is found in these authorities, it may be difficult to administer the provisions of the enactment effectively. Why it is said so is, that, on a permit being issued but at the same time the grantee thereof is not in a position to cater to the needs of the travelling public for want of diesel, then the grant of permit under such circumstances would not serve the object sought to be achieved by the Act. It is relevant in this context to note that the supply of diesel now is less than 10% of the diesel which used to be supplied during the corresponding period in the previous year. That means even those vehicles which are having valid permits may not be able to take all the trips they, under the permit, can take. Under such circumstances if more permits are issued, then it will end up in a situation where the vehicles, which were being operated on the basis of permits issued prior to the 'the crisis', may have to be withdrawn from the routes. Until the 'diesel crisis' is over, to my mind, the Regional Transport Authorities can even refuse to grant or issue the permits. 7. The order directing the Secretary, R.T.A to defer the issuance of the permit until the diesel crisis is over therefore cannot be said to be a direction without jurisdiction. 8. In the light of what is stated above it goes without saying that the Chairman, R.T.A who is also the delegate of the powers of the Civil Supplies Commissioner, has always the power even to revise permits for supply of diesel issued by the competent authorities. If that be the position the argument that the grantee is the holder of a permit for the purchase of diesel and therefore the permit within the meaning of the Act should have been issued, is not sustainable in law. If that be the position the argument that the grantee is the holder of a permit for the purchase of diesel and therefore the permit within the meaning of the Act should have been issued, is not sustainable in law. May be that he can move that authority for the issuance of the permit provided he can get the requisite permission from the Chairman of the authority that his is a fit case where the permit to purchase diesel requires to be issued and only the holder of such a permit for the supply of diesel can aspire to obtain the permit. With these observations, the Original Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Issue Photostat copy on usual terms.