JUDGMENT : A. Pasayat, J. - The only question that needs adjudication in this writ application relates to conditions which may be attached to a permit issued by a Regional Transport Authority (in short, 'RTA') to a stage carriage under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, the 'Act'). 2. The impugned condition imposed by the concerned transport authority reads as follows: "Full concession to blind and physically handicapped persons to the extent of 50% and above and 50% concession to blind and physically handicapped persons between 40% - 30%. Two seats should be kept reserved for blind and physically handicapped persons." According to petitioner, this is not one of the twenty-three conditions specified in Sub-section (2) of Section 72 of the Act, and this is also not one of the conditions which can be encompassed by Clauses (i) to (xxiv). It is stated that though the condition obligated the stage carriage owner to forego fare or collect a part of it, no consequential reduction in the tax payable is granted by the authorities. According to learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department, the condition is a philanthropic one intended as a step to assist physically handicapped, and technically should not stand on the way of imposing such a condition. So far as concession of tax aspect is concerned, it is said that the amount involved is too meagre to provide foundation for an objection. 3. Section 72 of the Act is identical to Section 48 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (in short, the 'old Act'). Section 70 relates to making of application for permit 1or stage carriages. Section 80 provides the procedure for applying for and granting of permits. Section 71 prescribes the procedure for considering the applications for grant of permit for stage carriages and Section 72 deals with grant of permits for stage carriages. Sub-Section (1) of Section 72 empowers the transport authority to pass three kinds of orders, namely (i) granting permit in accordance with the application; (ii) granting the permit with modifications; and (iii) refusing to grant a permit Sub-Section (2) empowers the transport authority to attach to the permit any one or more of the conditions set out, in Clauses (i) to (xxiv). The last clause is a residuary clause. 4. In Raman and Raman Ltd. Vs. The last clause is a residuary clause. 4. In Raman and Raman Ltd. Vs. The State of Madras and Another the Supreme Court observed that in proceedings under Sections 47, 64 and 64-A of the old Act (corresponding to Sections 71, 89 and 90 of the Act) there is no determination of any individual's rights and from that point of view the functions of the authorities may be regarded as executive or administrative. On the other hand, it may be said that a person has the fundamental right to carry on his business of plying buses and therefore, has the light to have the statutory functions of these authorities property exercised in which case they would be quasi-judicial functions. In granting or refusing a permit the RTA u/s 72 exercises administrative functions but it must act quasi-judicially. The Act is a statute which creates new rights and liabilities, and prescribes elaborate procedure for their regulation. No one is emitted to a permit as of right even if he fulfils all the prescribed conditions. Grant of permit is entirely a matter within discretion of transport authorities, and naturally depends on several circumstances which have to be taken into account. But the discretion is to be exercised in a judicial manner. It is open to the RTA not to attach any of the conditions enumerated in Clauses (i)to (xxiv) of Sub-Section (2) of Section 72. See. 84, however, lays dawn general conditions attaching to all permits. 4. The residuary Clause (xxiv) reads as follows: ''(xxiv) any other conditions which may be prescribed." Undisputedly the condition which is assailed in this writ application is not one covered by Clauses (i) to (xxiii) The only question that needs to be considered, therefore, is whether it is covered by Clause (xxiv). The word 'prescribed' is defined in Section 2(32) o1 the Act. and means prescribed by the Rules made under the Act. Undisputedly no rule relating to imposition of conditions under challenge has been framed. Therefore, the condition as imposed by the transport authority does not meet requirements of law, and could not have been attached to the permit. The writ application is allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. P.C. Naik, J. 5. I agree.