A All the decisions to which we have referred above have taken thi: view that by area is meant the road, the physical tract, over which fhe motor vehicles ply without reference to any notional line of travel. Of course, this meaning was given to the word 'area' in the context of the provisions of the Act considered in these cases, in none of which section 45 came up for consideration.. We do not however find any reason to think that 'area' in section 45 (I) has a different connotation. B Except that the territorial jurisdiction of the regional transport authori- ties is fixed in terms of geographical area-districtwisc in the State of Karnataka-'area' in that widu fense is irrelevant to the purposes of the Act. Counsel for the respondent, Mysore State Road Transport Corporation, Bangalore, built an argument on the provisions of section 42 of the Act that the meaning of 'area' is not restricted only to the area of.motorable roads in a region. Section 42 prohibits the use of a c transport vehicle in any public place except in accordance with the conditions of a valid permit. A transport vehicle includes a motor vehicle used for the carriage of passengers [section 2(33) and section 2(25)]. Public place has been defined by section 2(24) of the Act as "'road, street, way or other place, whether a thoroughfare or not, to which the public have a right of access, and includes any place or stand at which passengers are picked up or set down by a stage car- D riage·'. It was argued that a contract carriage which does not ply on a fixed route could be used in any public place which need not necessarily be a road; this, according to counsel, indicated that the word area occurring in section 45 ( 1) meant geographical area and not motorable roads only. We do not find it possible to accept this contention. Assuming that a contract carriage could be used in places which are not really roads, the fact remains that a contract carriage E being a motor vehicle is intended for use upon roads, and any casual use of it in places other than roads is not decisive on the interpretation of the word area. The prohibition against the use of transport vehicles in public places which are not roads serves to repel a possible claim that for using a motor vehicle in places which cannot be called roads no permit was necessary. We hold therefore that the word area in the first proviso to section 45 (I ) of the Act means the area of motorablc F roads within the territorial jurisdiction of a regional transport authority. The Regional Transport Authority, Mandya, held that it had within its jurisdiction the largest area o[ motorable roads in the State of Karnmaka. and this finding has not been disturbed by the appellate tribunal. The appellate tribunal thought that the expression "motor- abie roads" was vague as the area con1prising of motorablc roads "would be changing from time to time", but the jurisdiction of a G regional transport authority to grant an inter-regional permit depelltds on the existing area of motorable roads when an application for a per- mit js niadc.
