Amar Taxi Service vs Commissioner Of Police And Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 246 Del

*         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                            W.P.(C) 5983/2011

                                                    Decided on: 13.01.2012
IN THE MATTER OF
AMAR TAXI SERVICE                                         ..... Petitioner
                         Through: Mr. O.P. Saxena, Advocate


                    versus


COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS.                    ..... Respondents
                   Through: Ms. Sana Ansari, Advocate for
                   Ms. Zubeda Begum, Advocate for R-1 to R-3.
                   Mr. Ajay Arora, Advocate with Mr. Kapil Dutta,
                   Advocate for respondents No.4 and 5/MCD.

CORAM
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI


HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL)


1.          The present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia

to restrain the respondents from removing/obstructing/interfering with

the petitioner taxi stand and calling upon them to follow due process of

law in case there is any legitimate reason to shift the petitioner taxi stand

situated near Alankar cinema now known as CCC, Lajpat Nagar, New

Delhi.

2.          In support of his submission that the taxi stand in question

had been allotted to the petitioner, counsel for the petitioner relies upon

the order dated 02.04.1981 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi.

The aforesaid order is reproduced hereinbelow:-


W.P.(C) 5983/2011                                               Page 1 of 7
             "OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE: DELHI
                                   ORDER

Whereas the halting and parking of taxis during in Delhi are not properly committed and taxis and required to be parked for being available to the general public at many places;

Now, therefore, I, P.S. Bhinder, Commissioner of Police, Delhi, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under Section 28(1)(B) of Delhi Police Act, 1978, do hereby order that the places specified in the schedule annexed hereto shall be used as General Taxi Stands for parking of number of taxis indicated against each side with the condition that no permanent or temporary structure shall be erected at the General Taxi Stands.

This order shall come into force with immediate effect.

This order shall be published for information of the general public in the official gazette and by affixing a copy on the notice boards of the offices of all District Deputy Commissioners of Police and all Police Stations in Delhi/New Delhi.

Given under my hands and seal of this office the 2nd April, 1981.

Sd/- (P.S. BHINDER) COMMISSIONER OF POLICE: DELHI."

3. Counsel for the petitioner also relies on the letter dated

20.07.1981 issued by respondents No.4 and 5/MCD granting a no

objection certificate to the petitioner for installation of a wooden cabin

measuring 4‟x4‟ for installation of a telephone booth at the approved taxi

stand in question. The conditions of the allotment are set out in the

aforesaid letter.

4. A bare perusal of the order dated 02.04.1981 passed by

the Commissioner of Police, Delhi makes it abundantly clear that the taxi

stand in question was never allotted to the petitioner. Rather, it was only

a notification issued in respect of General Taxi Stands for parking of taxis

at eighteen sites in Delhi, as per an attached list, wherein the site, subject

matter of the present petition featured at Serial No.10 and it was

stipulated that only five taxis could be accommodated there. A further

condition was imposed in the aforesaid order that no permanent or

temporary structure could be erected at the General Taxi Stands. In view

of the aforesaid order, the relief sought by the petitioner in the present

petition is misconceived for the reason that there was no such allotment

of the taxi stand in question in favour of the petitioner as claimed and,

therefore, the petitioner cannot seek any special relief in respect of the

said taxi stand and nor can any relief of allotment of another site be

granted to the petitioner in the present proceedings.

5. Pertinently, counsel for respondents No.1 to 3/Delhi Police

draws the attention of the Court to the counter affidavit filed by the said

respondents to state that the subject General Taxi Stand has not been de-

notified and the same remains functional at the designated place.

Furthermore, in view of the fact that the taxi stand in question is a

General Taxi Stand and no special rights have accrued in favour of the

petitioner for it to claim that only the vehicles owned by it can be parked

at the subject site, the petitioner is also bound by the Rules pertaining to

operation of the General Taxi Stands in terms of the recommendations

made by the Committee constituted for framing policy regarding General

Taxi Stands in Delhi, as directed by a Division Bench of this Court in the

judgment dated 04.12.1996 in WP(C)No.3132/2001 (Annexure R-2 to the

counter affidavit filed by respondent No.1). One of the recommendations

of the aforesaid Committee is that the taxis would be required to "halt

and go places" instead of being permanently parked there. This Rule has

been formulated so as to rule out any unauthorized occupation by

individuals on public land and to prevent individuals from claiming right of

ownership by squatting there. Counsel for respondents No.1 to 3/Delhi

Police states that the "halt and go places" parking bays for taxis is not to

be owned by any individual or authority and all the authorities including

PWD, MCD, NDMC, DDA and L&DO have been called upon not to confer

any Tehbazari rights for the sites in question in favour of any individual

and ensure that no pucca/semi pucca structure, water, electricity and

telephone connection would be allowed at the said sites which are termed

as "halt and go places" for taxis.

6. Counsel for respondents No.4 and 5/MCD supports the

aforesaid submission made by the counsel for respondents No.1 to

3/Delhi Police and hands over a copy of the order dated 06.05.2011

passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Traffic (Headquarters),

Delhi, relating to the General Taxi Stand situated at Lodhi Road to submit

that identical orders are being passed by the Delhi Police in respect of all

General Taxi Stands in Delhi.

7. The aforesaid order dated 6.5.2011 has been passed by the

Deputy Commissioner of Police under Section 3 of the Delhi Control of

Vehicular and other Traffic on Road & Street Regulation, 1980 and

stipulates as below:-

"a. Neither Yadav Singh Rawat or any other individual taxi driver would have any right to the exclusive use of the subject General Taxi Stand, as the taxi stands are not notified in the name of any individual.

b. Henceforth, the above mentioned site of General Taxi Stand located at the pavement of Service Road, opposite the Unido Hostal Flats, (Now P.V. Hostel Flats), behind and alongside the wall of NBCC building, Bhishmpitamah Marg, New Delhi (near Horticulture Nursery and Electric Sub-Division, New Delhi) would be known as "Halt and Go Place" for taxis for the convenience of public, as per policy. A copy of rough sketch is enclosed.

c. That the aforesaid Halt and Go Place for taxis would not be owned by any individual or authority and is notified on temporary basis. The notifying authority reserves the right to cancel the aforesaid notification subsequently in public interest for reason of traffic regulation, requirement of security, local complaints, refusal, misbehavior, overcharging, or any subsequent objection raised by the land owning agency. CPWD/MCD/NDMC/DDA/L&DO etc. shall not confer any tehbazari rights for the site to any individual. No pucca/semi pucca structure, water, electricity and telephone connection shall be allowed on the site aforesaid „Halt & Go Place‟ for taxis.

8. Counsel for respondents No.1 to 3/Delhi Police states that the

aforesaid recommendations of Delhi Police came up for scrutiny of the

Court in W.P.(C) 10597-98/2005 entitled Jaipur Taxi Service & Anr. vs.

Commissioner of Police, which was decided on 13.10.2011, wherein the

Court recorded the statement made on behalf of Delhi Police that there is

no policy of issuing licenses of any sites for use as Taxi Stand and only

parking bays for the purpose of "Halt and Go" are notified. The relevant

para No. 12 of the aforesaid order is reproduced hereinbelow :-

"12. Ms. Anita Roy, ACP (Traffic), South-East present in Court states that now there is no policy of issuing licenses of any sites for use as a Taxi Stand and only parking bays for the purposes of "Halt & Go" are notified. She clarifies that in the said parking bays, no particular taxi or taxi operator can claim a right to park the vehicle and any taxi belonging to whosoever can be parked therein on first come first basis and subject to availability. It is further stated that no booth, permanent or temporary as used to be earlier permitted for Taxi Stands can also be allowed."

9. Counsel for respondents No.4 and 5/MCD states that the

structure constructed at the taxi stand in question was noticed by the

Monitoring Committee appointed by the Supreme Court and found to be

an unauthorized structure and an encroachment and further, in terms of

the directions issued by the said Committee, the said unauthorized

construction was razed to the ground as long back as in the year 2008.

10. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions made by the

counsels for the respondents and in view of the assurance given by the

counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not claim any exclusive

vested right in the taxi stand in question, directions are issued to the

petitioner to follow "halt and go places" policy of the Delhi Police, and use

the parking bay in question for parking its taxies within the limitation of

the numbers prescribed in the office order dated 2.4.1981, and on the

same terms and conditions which govern taxis for accommodation at all

the parking bays notified by Delhi Police for the purpose of "Halt & Go

places".

The petition is disposed of while leaving the parties to bear

their own costs.

                                                       (HIMA KOHLI)
JANUARY    13, 2012                                       JUDGE
rkb