Monitoring and Survey of Vehicles on Unauthorized Use of Official Symbols on Private Vehicles is a Continuous Process – Madras High Court

In a crucial verdict, the Madras High Court affirmed the continuous nature of state responsibilities in the matter of unauthorized stickers and artifacts on private vehicles. “Monitoring and survey of such vehicles is a continuous process,” noted the bench comprising The Hon’ble Chief Justice Mr. Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and The Hon’ble Justice Mr. P.D. Audikesavalu.

The petitioner, Dr. Krithika B, sought a writ of Mandamus directing the state authorities to remove unauthorized use of official emblems, phrases, and symbols, such as “Govt of India”, “Government of Tamil Nadu”, “High Court”, and “Police” from private vehicles.

In the judgment, the Court referred to an earlier order in W.P.No.14697 of 2014 that laid down guidelines for preventing such misuse and for penal action against the violators. “The directions given by the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid order would take care of the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition also,” said the bench.

During the proceedings, the Additional Public Prosecutor informed the Court that 104,017 private vehicles with unauthorized symbols had been detected so far and a fine of Rs. 16,56,000 had been imposed on the violators.

“Action is required to be taken by the authorities,” the Court observed, emphasizing the continuous need for monitoring such activities. An assurance was also provided by the Additional Government Pleader regarding the state’s commitment to enforcing rules and regulations concerning this issue.

The Court disposed of the writ petition, stating that it stands in light of previous guidelines and steps already taken by the authorities. There was no order as to the costs of the proceedings.

The decision is seen as a significant reinforcement of the state’s ongoing responsibility in curbing the unauthorized use of official symbols and instilling discipline on the road.

For legal inquiries, the petitioner was represented by Mr. Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola, and the respondents were represented by Mr. K.M.D. Muhilan, Additional Government Pleader for Respondents 1 to 3, and Mr. R. Muniapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor, assisted by Mr. C.E. Pratap, Government Advocate for Respondent-4.

Date of Decision:  20.09.2023 

Dr.Krithika B vs The Addl. Chief Secretary

• Lawyer E- News Android Mobile App
• Latest Legal News

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Dr_Krithika_Vs_Add_Chief_Sec_20Sep23_MadHC.pdf"]