AJAY CANU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question that is involved in this petition relates to the validity of Rule 498-A of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1964 and a notification dated July 8, 1986 issued by the respondent No. 3, the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad and Secunderabad, in exercise of his powers under Section 21(1) of the Hyderabad City Police Act, inter alia, directing that in order to ensure adequate safety of two-wheeler riders, wearing of protective helmets is made compulsory for riders of motor-cycles and scooters, as envisaged by Rule 498-A, with effect from August 1, 1986.

(2.) Rule 498-A provides as follows:-

(3.) The petitioner, who is a student and has a permanent driving licence for a two-wheeler vehicle, filed a writ petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court challenging the validity of the said notification as also of Rule 498-A on the ground that the same was violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(d) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It was contended by the petitioner before the High Court that as section 85-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was yet to be enforced, Rule 498-A was illegal and ultra vires the Motor Vehicles Act. It was also contended that the wearing of helmets preventing the free flow of breeze to the head would result in giddiness and affect sight and hearing.