Om Prakash vs Union Of India & Others
2009 Latest Caselaw 291 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     W.P.(C) 2174/2007

%                          Date of decision : 28th January, 2009.

      OM PRAKASH                       ..... Petitioner
                           Through MS. Kiran Bairwa, advocate.

                    versus

      U.O.I & ORS                    ..... Respondent
                           Through Mr.Yogesh Malhotra, advocate for R-1.
                           Ms. Zubeda Begum, advocate for R-2.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

                 ORDER

By way of the present Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner

alleges non compliance and flouting of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles

Act and Rules by trucks/vehicles. It is alleged that only trucks/vehicles

with Euro II & III Emission Norms can ply and transport goods in Delhi.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents have pointed out that National

Permits are issued in case of goods carriages and All India Tourist Permit

are issued in case of passenger vehicles and it is mandatory that these

vehicles should comply with Euro II norms. It is also stated that Supreme

Court has issued directions that goods' vehicles more than 15 years old,

from the date of initial registration, should not ply in Delhi. It is stated that

the Transport Directorate is ensuring compliance of the Motor Vehicles Act

and the directions issued by the Supreme Court.

3. Our attention is drawn to the counter affidavit which states that 146

goods carriages registered outside Delhi and 39 vehicles registered in Delhi

which were engaged by oil sector undertakings have been prosecuted

since March, 2006 till November, 2007 for violation of the aforesaid

enactment and permit conditions. Our attention is also drawn to the Order

dated 28th February, 2007 passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1349/2007

titled Dev Raj versus Union of India and others wherein similar contentions

were raised. In the said case this Court noticed several orders and

directions passed by the Supreme Court in respect of commercial vehicles.

The said Writ Petition was disposed of observing that passing of fresh

orders is likely to cause confusion and conflict with the Orders/directions

passed by the Supreme Court. Liberty was also granted to the petitioner

therein to approach Bhure Lal Committee.

4. In view of the affidavit and Order dated 28th February, 2007 passed

in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1349/2007, we are not inclined to the pass any

further direction/orders and entertain the present Writ Petition and the

same is accordingly disposed of. If required the petitioner may approach

Bhure Lal Committee with specific instances and grounds.

CHIEF JUSTICE

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

JANUARY 28, 2009 P