MOHAMMED ABBAS Vs. GOVENMENT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these cases, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the notification dated 23/3/2011 issued under Section 74(3)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) whereby the State Government has decided to increase the number of autorickshaw permits from 85,000 to 1,25,000 for the City of Bangalore.

(2.) The petitioners contend that large number of motor vehicles including buses, cars, two wheelers and autorickshaws are using the roads of the City of Bangalore. THEre is a constant increase in the number of vehicles everyday without improvement of the roads. It is further contended that the roads of Bangalore City are not wide enough to accommodate the ever-increasing motor vehicles. Many of the existing roads are undergoing changes on account of metro railway work, under passes, grade separators, etc., resulting in further reduction of usable width of the roads causing blockade, deviation, traffic jams, etc. THE time taken to cover between the two points has increased. THEre is difficulty in regulation and control of traffic and constant danger to the life of the road users. THE petitioners being the autorickshaw drivers have to be on the roads from morning till night to earn their livelihood. THEy are exposed to danger of accidents and health hazards due to air and sound pollution. THEre is a great urgency to ease the traffic congestion and overcrowding of motor vehicles on the roads. It is further contended that providing mass public transport system such as metro rail would considerably reduce the pressure on the city roads. THE Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation has increased the number of buses in the city. THE first respondent without appreciating the fact of overcrowding of the roads and the need for taking steps to reduce the motor vehicles in Bangalore city, has increased the autorickshaw permits from 85,000 to 1,25,000 by the impugned notification. Allowing of additional 40,000 autorickshaws will add to the already over crowded city roads, air pollution, noise pollution and other traffic problems endangering safety of the petitioners and the general public.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners contend that the notification issued by the first respondent is contrary to sub-section (3)(a) of Section 74 of the Act. It is argued that the State Government is authorised to issue the notification if so directed by the Central Government limiting the number of contract carriages generally or of any specified type as may be fixed and specified in the notification before operating on city routes in towns with a population of not less than five lakhs. Before issuance of the notification, the State Government has taken into consideration the number of vehicles, road conditions and other relevant factors. The impugned notification does not indicate the consideration of the said mandatory requirements. The State Government had already issued a notification increasing the number of autorickshaws from 80,000 to 85,000 in the year 2010 and even before the utilisation of the increased 5000 permits, the Government has increased the quota to 1,25,000. The condition of the road has not been examined. Many of the city roads were laid long back. They are not wide enough to cater to the present day need. They are congested due to the increase in the number of all types of vehicles resulting in frequent traffic jams, blockade, air and noise pollution endangering safety of public life. There is no consideration of other relevant factors such as introduction of city buses by the BMTC and the effect of proposed metro and the difficulties faced by the public due to metro work. The effect of the order increasing the number of autorickshaws has far reaching effect. It would affect the petitioners as also the residents of Bangalore their right to life free from danger of air and sound pollution.