Transport Dept told to hear out bus operators

In connection with the show-cause notices issued to operators of integral coaches and super integral coaches, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the Punjab Transport Department to give personal hearing to the operators before proceeding further.

Advertisement

There are over 300 integral coaches and super integral coaches running in the state. Sources in the department had issued notices to the operators of the integral and super integral coaches before the stake holders approached the high court.

In 2012, the high court had directed the government to cancel illegal permits to private operators. The order was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2016. Despite the Supreme Court’s order in 2016 to cancel the permits issued illegally, the transport companies, mainly owned by high-profile politicians, continue to ply buses on key routes.

These permits, issued during the previous SAD-BJP tenure, allowed integral coaches and luxury buses to run on highly lucrative routes, primarily to Chandigarh from different parts of the state. The private operators continue to run buses on illegal extensions in the original bus route permits.

In 2011, the state government had amended the transport scheme allowing the operations of air conditioned integral coaches or super integral coaches within the state and to operate on the neighbouring inter-state routes maximum up to a distance of 15 km.

In its 2018 transport policy, the state government stated to cancel these extensions and other anomalies in the 2011 amended scheme but nothing had been done.

Besides, the Transport Department had been directed to give personal hearing to cases of illegal clubbing of stage carriage permits. The department had issued notices to operators for illegally extending their routes by getting stage carriage permits clubbed. As per norms, bus permits can be extended only once and not multiple times.

The Small Scale Bus Operators Association’s president, JS Grewal, claimed that despite the Supreme Court striking down the amendments made in the 2011 scheme, the state government in the past had failed defend the case in the courts.