Section 9 A&C Act Relief Available Until Award Is Actually Enforced, Even After It Becomes Enforceable: Telangana High Court Matrimonial Litigations Must Not Degenerate Into Contests Of Mutual Humiliation By Weaponising Private Images: Delhi High Court Unarmed Witnesses’ Inaction Against Armed Assailants Justified By Instinct Of Self-Preservation; Testimony Cannot Be Discarded: Allahabad High Court Ocular Evidence Outweighs Motive: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based On Reliable Eyewitness Testimony Arrest Illegal If Written 'Grounds Of Arrest' Not Furnished To Accused; Communication Of Mere 'Reasons' Insufficient: Bombay High Court Absence Of Territorial Jurisdiction No Ground To Quash FIR At Threshold If Allegations Disclose Cognizable Offence: Calcutta High Court Proof Of Demand Is Sine Qua Non For PC Act Conviction; Voice Recordings Inadmissible Without Sec 65-B Certificate: Chhattisgarh HC Section 91 IEA | Disposition Of Immovable Property Cannot Be Proved By Oral Evidence If Written Document Not Produced: Delhi High Court NRC Legacy Data Extracts Inadmissible Without Section 65B Certificate; PAN Card & EPIC Not Proof Of Citizenship: Gauhati High Court Testimony Of Injured Witness Entitled To Great Weight; Minor Contradictions Due To Lapse Of Memory Cannot Discard Prosecution Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Kerala High Court Remands Teacher Seniority Dispute For Fresh Consideration To Verify If Senior Teacher Relinquished Promotion Claim Receipt Of DNA Report After Testimony Doesn't Automatically Confer Right To Recall Witness For Further Cross-Examination: Madhya Pradesh High Court Possession Of 'Bhang' Not An Offence Under NDPS Act, Specific Definition Excludes It: Jharkhand High Court Acquits Man Trial Court Cannot Reject Request For Handwriting Expert Merely Because Signatures Are On Photocopies: Punjab & Haryana High Court

"Delhi High Court Upholds Regulation of Rural Transport Vehicles: 'No Further Orders Required,' Says Justice Prateek Jalan"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court, led by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN, has upheld the regulation of rural transport vehicles, particularly addressing the issue of illegal plying of stage carriages on specified routes. The court's decision comes in response to two writ petitions filed by drivers/operators of Rural Transport Vehicles operating under the Gramin Sewa scheme.

The petitioners, represented by Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ms. Surabhi Mishra, and Mr. Akash Sahay, Advocates, sought a direction from the court to remove illegal vehicles operating as stage carriages on specific routes. These routes, covered under the Gramin Sewa scheme, include Route No. 60 (Mukandpur to Azadpur Delhi), GS-9 (Shastri Park Metro Station to Mandawli), and GS-147 (Jheel to Kalyanpuri).

The petitioners' arguments were based on a notification dated 11.12.2014, issued by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD), which prohibited the plying of e-rickshaws on 236 roads listed in the notification.

The court carefully examined the facts of the case, including status reports submitted by GNCTD, which acknowledged the presence of unauthorized vehicles on Gramin Sewa routes. GNCTD also detailed actions taken against these illegal vehicles, including challans, impoundment, and prosecutions for various violations.

Justice Prateek Jalan observed, "In view of the action taken thus far, and the assurance of GNCTD that regular action will be taken in respect of the grievances of the petitioner, I am of the view that no further orders are required in this writ petition."

The court further encouraged the petitioners to submit specific suggestions to the concerned Assistant Commissioner of Police (Traffic) for consideration and appropriate action.

With these observations, the Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petitions, indicating its confidence in GNCTD's commitment to addressing the petitioners' concerns.

This judgment reinforces the importance of regulatory measures in the transportation sector and highlights the court's role in ensuring compliance with the law.

Date of Decision: September 13, 2023

FAROOQ vs COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT GNCT OF DELHI AND ANR

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Arvind_Kumar_Vs_COMMISSIONER_OF_TRANSPORT_GNCT_Of_Delhi_And_ANR_HC_DLH.pdf"]

Latest Legal News