ARUN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the seizure / detention of vehicles belonging to the petitioner, bearing registrations numbers, RJ-09-PA-0065, rj-09-PA-0465, RJ-09-PA-0665, RJ-09-PA-0865, RJ-01-PA-2265, rj-01-PA-2465, RJ-01-PA-2665, RJ-01-PA-2865. The seizure / detention of the said vehicles has been challenged on the ground that they have been seized / detained under Section 207 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), without there being any rules for the same framed by the Central Government. In the same breath, the petitioner has challenged the Delhi Motor Vehicles (Second Amendment)Rules, 2004, whereby sub-rules (7), (8), (9) and (10) have been added after rule 123 (6) of the Delhi Motor Vehicles Rules, 1993. The said sub-rules (7), (8), (9) and (10), which have been inserted by virtue of the Delhi Motor vehicles (Second Amendment) Rules, 2004, are as under:-

(2.) AT this juncture, we may point out that in CW 4686/1998, entitled m/s. Sreenath Travel Agency and Another v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Others [decided on 07. 07. 2003] : 2003 (71) DRJ 363, the question of seizure / detention of motor vehicles under Section 207 of the said Act was in issue. The point raised in that petition was that as per Section 207, the seizure and detention was to be done only in a 'prescribed manner' and, 'prescribed manner', as defined under the Act by virtue of Section 2 (32), meant "prescribed by the rules". Since no rules had been framed, such seizure and detention would be invalid. One of us (Badar Durrez Ahmed, J)heard that petition and agreed with the point urged on behalf of the petitioner and directed that, since no rules had been framed and, accordingly, no manner of seizure and detention had been prescribed, the power to seize and detain, itself, could not be exercised. It was also held that until the rules prescribing the manner of seizure / detention of vehicles under section 207 (1) of the said Act are made and enforced, no vehicle could be impounded in exercise of the power conferred under the said Section. The lt. Governor of Delhi, being aggrieved by the said decision, preferred an appeal being LPA No. 567/2003. During the pendency of the appeal, the rules impugned herein, came to be framed by the Government of NCT of Delhi. In view of the fact that rules had been framed under Section 207 (1) read with section 212 of the said Act, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the lt. Governor of Delhi, did not press the appeal and the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by virtue of the order dated 16. 07. 2004, by the Division Bench hearing the said LPA No. 567/2003.

(3.) THE present petition challenges the said rules on the ground that the government of NCT of Delhi did not have the power to frame such rules, which means that there are no rules which exist even today and, therefore, the petitioner's vehicles could not be seized / detained. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to the scheme of the Act. He submitted that the Act has been divided into several Chapters and at the end of most of the Chapters, there are provisions which empower either the State government or the Central Government to make rules in respect of the contents of the respective Chapters. For example, Chapter II, which deals with 'licencing of drivers of motor vehicles', contains Sections 27 and 28, which empower the Central Government and the State Government, respectively, to make rules. Chapter III, which deals with 'licencing of conductors or Stage Carriages', has only empowered, by virtue of Section 38, the State Government to make rules in respect of the provisions of that chapter. Similarly, Chapter IV, which deals with 'registration of motor vehicles', has once again empowered, by virtue of Sections 64 and 65, the central Government and the State Government, respectively, to make rules in respect of the subject matter of the said Chapter IV. There are other chapters which indicate that either the Central Government or the State government or both have been given powers to make rules in respect of the provisions contained in those Chapters.