H. N. TILHARI, J. ( 1 ) AGGRIEVED by the conditions to the following effect:1. A vehicle of not more than 10 years old having seating capacity of not less than 38+2 be produced within 30 days from the date of receipt of the proceedings assigning timings by the Secretary, R. T. A. 2. The vehicle shall be replaced immediately after 10years from the date of initial registration. which has been attached with the permit that has been granted in favour of the petitioner while granting the stage carriage permit in favour of the petitioners respectively. The petitioners in these Writ Petitions have sought the quashing of these conditions and it has been submitted before me that the R. T. A. had no jurisdiction to attach those conditions regarding the age of the vehicle or the condition to the effect that the vehicle cannot be more than 10 years old particularly when the Certificate of Fitness has been granted by the authorities under the Act and the vehicle is a registered one. As such it has been submitted that the imposition of the condition is without jursdiction. The learned Counsel Sri B. R. S. Gupta contented before me that it is under Section 59 of the Act that the Central Government by notification prescribed the ages for different category of motor vehicle. He contended unless the Certificate of Fitness and registration is granted the permits to ply a vehicle cannot be granted. So there is no jurisdiction in the authority granting permit to impose those conditions. I have applied my mind to these contentions of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. A bare reading of Section 59 would show that it is contained in chapter relating to registration of vehicle and in the matter of registration under Section 39, it is necessary that with the application of Registration, Certificate of Fitness is also to be furnished as is provided by Section 56 of the Act which is contained in Chapter 4 of the Act. According to Section 56 of the Motor vehicles Act that the transport vehicle shall not be deemed to be validly registered for the purpose of Section 39 unless it carries with it a Certificate of Fitness in the Form as may be prescribed by the Government, having been issued by the prescribed authority or by an authority referred under Section 2, to the effect that the vehicle complies for the time being with all requirements of the Act and Rules made thereunder. ( 2 ) A reading of sub-section (4) of Section further fortifies that certificate of Fitness, is essential and one of the conditions in the matter of granting permit. It provides that on the cancellation of this Fitness Certificate, the Certificate of registration as well as the permit granted in respect of any motor vehicle under Chapter 4 shall be deemed to be suspended until new Certificate of Fitness is granted. Section 59 no doubt provides and empowers the Central Government to prescribe ages for different class and different types of motor vehicles. It is the Central Government that is competent to exercise that power. ( 3 ) A perusal of Section 72 which relates to the grant of stage carriage permit reveals that under sub-section (2) of Section 72 provides that in case the Regional Transport Authority decides to grant the permit, it may grant the permit for the stage carriage for specified description and may subject to the Rules attached to the permit any one or more of the following conditions. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted before me that there is no such condition as to model or age of vehicle under Section 72. The description may not be with reference to the age that more than 7 years old motor vehicle cannot be used. It is not really fixing the age but it is a specified motor vehicle in respect of the stage carriage permit is being granted i. e. , a specific prescription. The description may not be with reference to the age that more than 7 years old motor vehicle cannot be used. It is not really fixing the age but it is a specified motor vehicle in respect of the stage carriage permit is being granted i. e. , a specific prescription. As regards the power in this matter, I am of the opinion amongst the vehicles which have been certified or which have got Certificate of Fitness that they will come under the Act or Rules satisfy the conditions of fitness thereunder, amongst those vehicles, looking to the conditions of the roads that the distance to be covered under or in respect of the permit is prayed for being granted and the convenience and the safety of the public, in the interest of the public it can be beyond doubt said that it is open to the Regional Transport authority to prescribe certain age the Regional Transport authority can say that the permit is granted for a vehicle of such and such description and not otherwise. But in what circumstances and conditions the authority fixes or has fixed a particular condition must be known to the party before hand or and be brought to notice of persons seeking the permit in some reasonable manner to enable them to have their say if necessary in regard thereto. But putting a condition and thereunder compelling the party not to make use of the vehicle which is certified for user under Section 56 without his being given opportunity of having his say is tantamount depriving him of his legal right irrationally. No doubt there may be specified description which may be useful from the point of public interest but in such cases while granting the permits before such conditions are imposed in respect of a particular vehicle there should be no arbitrariness or negation of rule of law and justice, the conditions need be reasonable in the context route, general interest of public and party seeking must be availed opportunity to have his say before imposition of onerous condition. Any condition that is to be imposed without party made aware of it and without an opportunity of having a say may be arbitrary in nature. I have taken this view in the case, namely P. S. Nageshappa v Regional Transport Authority, Shimoga. Any condition that is to be imposed without party made aware of it and without an opportunity of having a say may be arbitrary in nature. I have taken this view in the case, namely P. S. Nageshappa v Regional Transport Authority, Shimoga. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Regional Transport Authority to the effect that in the matter of Conditions No. 1 and 2 the petitioners may be allowed opportunity to have say and they may be heard and thereafter if there is no substance in the objection of the party may be open to the Transport Authority to maintain the condition, for petitioner's safety, the authority as to their plea, it may delete or vary the condition. The Regional Transport authority is directed to dispose of the matters within two months from the date of communication of this Order. Till the matter is finally disposed of by the Regional Transport Authority the petitioners may be allowed to operate the vehicles as they have been doing. --- *** --- .