IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT...

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

WRIT JURISDICTION

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.________ OF 2015

(In The Matter of a Public Interest Litigation)

IN THE MATTER OF:

Shweta Kapoor Advocate

D/o R.K. KAPOOR, Advocate,

B-2/14, S.J. Enclave,

New Delhi-110029. ………..Petitioner

Versus

1.

The Govt. of NCT of Delhi,

Through its Chief Secretary, New

Secretariat, I.P.Estate, New Delhi

2. The Lieutenant Governor of Delhi,

Raj Niwas Marg, Delhi

…..RESPONDENTS

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 226

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA CHALLENGING

THE ACTION/DECISION OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1

MADE PUBLIC VIDE THE PRESS RELEASE BY THE

2

CHIEF SECRETARY OF DELHI GOVERNMENT Sh.

K.K SHARMA, ISSUED ON 05.12.2015 WHEREIN THE

GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY

OF DELHI, HAS DECIDED TO PROHIBIT THE PLYING

ON ROADS OF VEHICLES WITH ODD/EVEN

REGISTRATION NUMBERS ON ALTERNATE DAYS IN

DELHI W.E.F. 1.1.2016 BEING ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL,

IRRATIONAL, ILLOGICAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL,

WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND VIOLATIVE OF THE

PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 14, 19(1)(g) , 21, 300 A OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND BEING AGAINST

PUBLIC INTEREST PARTICULARLY WHEN THERE IS

A TOTAL LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC

SAFETY PARTICULARLY FOR WOMEN WHERE

BUSES AND PRIVATE TAXIS HAVE BECOME A

HORROR AT ODD HOURS IN DELHI AND DECISION

HAS BEEN TAKEN WITHOUT PUBLIC DEBATE AND

WITHOUT TAKING THE VIEWS OF THE AAM AADMI

WHO WOULD BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY SUCH

AN ACTION AND FOR OTHER CONNECTED

MEASURES AND SUGGESTIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN

IGNORED BY THE RESPONDENTS.

To

The Hon‟ble the Chief Justice of

3

Delhi High Court and His Companion

Judges of the High Court of Delhi.

The humble Petition

of the Petitioner above named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

I. That the writ petitioner has no personal interest in the litigation

and that the petiitioner is not guided by self-gain or for gain

of any other person/institution/body and that there is no

motive other than of public interest in filing the writ petition.

II. That all the Acts and inquiries made in the present writ

petition have their source from provisions of the

Constitution of India and the law declared by the Hon‟ble

Supreme Court of India in a number of cases particularly in

the light of media reports, newspaper articles and News and

public opinion gathered from the media and the press

release made by the Chief Secretary of NCT.

III. That the class of persons that shall be benefitted by the writ

petition shall be the people of Delhi. Every citizen of India

living in Delhi would be benefitted by the decision of the

issues raised in the writ petition. Therefore, an

authoritative declaration of law is required by this Hon‟ble

4

Court. All such persons who may include the poor strata of

the society also who are incapable of accessing the Courts

themselves individually.

IV. That the persons/bodies/institutions likely to be affected by

the orders sought in the writ petition have been impleaded

as parties as respondents and that to the knowledge of the

petitioner no other persons/bodies/institutions are likely to

be affected by the orders sought in the writ petition.

V. That the Petitioner is an Advocate practicing mainly in the

High Court of Delhi and Supreme Court of India. She is

registered with the bar Council of Delhi and is a member of

the Supreme Court Bar Association. The petitioner being

an enlightened citizen strongly believes in the Rule of Law

and believes that everybody and every institution should

abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and

institutions and always encourages the spirit of enquiry nd

reform which is incorporated in the directive principles and

the fundamental duties incorporated under Article 51A of

the Constitution. The present writ petition has been filed in

view of the violation of the fundamental rights of the citizens

of India living in Delhi and practicing various

professions/avocations and earning their livelihood by

travelling from one area of Delhi to the other and also

sometimes upto the National Capital Region to reach their

place of business/work or employment as well as for the

5

large number of disabled persons and persons suffering

for motor problems and physical ailments. The

petitioner has approached this honourable court for

issuance of a writ restraining the respondent authorities

from implementing the law relating to the plying of the

vehicles with Odd/even registration numbers of private

vehicles/ cars in Delhi. The imposition of such a policy/law

would be contrary to public interest and has been imposed

without any public debate or discussion and without

appreciating understanding the situation and facts and

circumstances in India and particularly in Delhi which are

totally different from other countries. For the sake of

relevance a copy newspaper report published in Times of

India, English Edition, dated 5.12.2015 is annexed herewith

as ANNEXURE-P-1.

That the petitioner has the means to pay the costs, if any,

imposed by the Court and undertakes to the Court that he

would pay such costs if imposed.

VI. That since the matter is extremely urgent and purely relates

to the enforcement of the transport arrangement in the city

of Delhi as stated by the respondents in their press release

dated 4.11.2015 and 5.11.2015 therefore, no representation

as such is required to be made and a delay shall be caused

if this Hon‟ble Court does not provide an urgent adjudication

6

on the issues which have been raised in the present civil

writ petition.

VII. That the petitioner had earlier also filed the Public Interest

Litigation with reference to the Provisions of the Juvenile

Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 in the

High Court of Delhi namely WP (c) No. 143/2013 No. which

was subsequently transferred to the honourable Supreme

Court as T.C. © No. 82/2013 where similar matters were

pending before the Honourable Supreme Court under writ

jurisdiction and all the matters including the matter filed by

the present writ petitioner were disposed of by the

Honourable Supreme Court vide judgement dated 17th July,

2013 as reported in 2013 volume 7 Supreme Court cases

page No. 705.

VIII. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar writ

petition before this Hon‟ble Court or before the Ho‟ble

Supreme Court of India relating to the issue raised in the

present writ petition.

IX. That the controversy in the present case is that whether the

respondents could make a policy for modifying the vehicular

movement in the City of Delhi in a manner which is violative of

the constitutional guarantees as bestowed upon the citizens of

Delhi by the Constitution of India particularly the rights granted

under Article 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 300 A etc of the Constitution of

India.

7

X. That briefly the facts leading to the filing of the present writ

petition are as follows:-

1. That this Writ Petition has been filed under article 226 of the

Constitution of India, against violation of the fundamental

and constitutional rights of the citizens of the country, living

in Delhi as granted under article 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 300 A and

the Directive Principles of the State Policy as enshrined

under the Constitution of India.

2. That the question for consideration is that whether it is in

public interest to make a policy for restricted movement of

private vehicles specifically privately owned cars without

having conducted a detailed study about its pros and cons

and without considering the disturbing effect the same shall

have on the public at large.

3. It has been noted in several media coverages that the

respondents has reacted to the fact that this Hon‟ble Court

has called living in Delhi like living in a „gas chamber‟. It is

but obvious that the respondents have come up with a

reaction plan rather than an action plan, and the reaction

plan is also without calling for the public debate and

considering the pros and cones.

4. That the knee jerk reaction of the respondents have left the

citizens of this city high and dry leaving them wondering

about the indifferent attitude of the respondents towards

8

them as well upset over the arbitrary and unreasonable

approach of respondents towards guarantying the

Constitution and fundamental rights of the ordinary citizens

of this country. The AAM AADMI has been made to suffer

the arbitrary dictates of the respondents.

5. That the citizens of this city have business and occupational

hazards and to compound them there are issues of

undeveloped and unsafe public transport in Delhi. It is a

matter of concern that the respondents have not been able

to provide a safe public transport to the women of this city.

That the women who have always felt unsafe in this city felt

safe driving their own vehicles back from their workplaces

late at night or even after sun dawn or engaging their own

drivers where they have the paying capacity but now they

will have to face the horrors on alternate days. The only

safe privilege of women is being curtailed by the

respondents by making an unreasonable and arbitrary

traffic plan by way of which women with odd numbers of

cars shall not be able to drive to their work place or return

from their work place each day, that they do not have either

the even or odd number of registration plate, depending on

the day of the week. The thought of taking public transport

late at night which is neither well lit nor crowded makes

women feel unsafe and shivery. The fact that the same

shall become mandatory will leave many looking for

9

alternative options like forcing them to leave their jobs. It is

not out of place to mention that women do not feel safe

even travelling by crowded buses and crowded metro trains

because the horror and ordeal that women go through in

public transport is best left unsaid. Even their possessions

are not safe be it jewellery or other items/articles. That due

to this policy of the respondents, women who are trying to

step out of their houses to work and to study due to having

a private vehicle will not be able to continue with the same.

6. That the respondents have not taken into consideration that

there is a principle of „public will‟ under the democratic

system of governance and the same cannot be taken away/

usurped by issuing such directions and restrictions as in the

present case. That our constitution provides for

implementation of free will of the citizens of this country who

should be allowed to make a choice as to whether they

would want to opt for public transport or not. In the present

facts and circumstances the respondents are not leaving

the citizens of this city with any choice which is against the

principles of a democratic set up.

7. That the respondents have not taken into consideration the

fact that there are many people in the city of Delhi who are

differently abled and have modified private vehicles by way

of which they reach their workplace and under no

circumstance they would be able to commute by public

10

transport be it any day of the week. That such citizens who

have locomotive problems would be constrained and would

not be able to access their work place or recreation only

because they possess another number of the vehicle which

is different from the one which is applicable for the day by

the respondents.

8. That the respondents have absolutely ignored the fact that

there are several citizens in this city who have degenerative

ailments like rheumatic arthritis and similar medical

conditions. The same do not allow them to either walk long

distances as is the case in our metro stations or climb

buses as they do not have the agility and the stiffness in

their body parts does not allow them to raise their knees to

a height where they may be able to travel by buses or by

autos. That several persons with compulsory dialysis

problems need to carry their kits with themselves and

require a private vehicle for the same. That they will be left

out from carrying out their normal life in case such

restrictions are imposed on their movements.

9. That the respondents have vide their earlier orders and

notifications moved the industries at the outskirts of Delhi in

the National Capital Region. It is imperative for the

government to understand the concerns of such persons

who have to travel long distances to access their work

places. That there is little or no public transport to access

11

some of these places which are far and inaccessible without

a private vehicle. That curtailing of movement of citizens

basis the number of registration of the vehicles would also

leave several such citizens stranded on every alternate day.

10. Further, the city of Delhi has been developed over a period

of several decades as having a large supporting national

Capital region. It is a well known fact that these regions are

located in different states i.e e.g. Uttar Pradesh and

Haryana. That each state is differently developed and lacks

infrastructure and connectivity. It is a matter of public

knowledge that teaming millions reach the city of Delhi from

these districts or cross the city of Delhi to reach their work

places from NOIDA to Gurgaon and Gurgaon to NOIDA to

take an example. That these satellite districts were

developed with the main motive to provide impetus to

industries and these provide employment to several

persons who live in different parts of the city of Delhi or the

NCR. It is also necessary to note that most places in Delhi

or in these satellite towns are not connected in the first

place, let alone well connected with public transport and the

only option is to avail of a private vehicle. That every

alternate day these districts/ satellite towns shall become

inaccessible to several persons who have do not have the

registration number of the vehicle which is applicable on

12

that day. They may own vehicles which may be with odd or

even numbers but would not be able to enter Delhi.

11. That as per requirements in everyday work life several

professions are required to carry several staff members,

Junior advocates, clerks, files and their work tools like

laptops etc with themselves. A restriction like not being able

to commute by their private vehicles on a daily basis shall

curtail access of citizens to important files and documents

which could be voluminous sometimes. The fact that some

professions of this city will not be able to ply their own

vehicles on each day would imply that they would either

have to hire services of a taxi or an auto driver. The same

would lead to increase of expenses and is not a viable

option for every alternative day of the year.

12. That it is necessary to be noted that there are several life

saving professionals in this city, who are involved in

emergency operations in the city of Delhi e.g. surgeons, fire

men and they have to be available at their workplace on

receipt of a call. In case they do not have the vehicle with

the allowed number plate registration for that date, it would

curtail them from performing their duties. It is to be noted

that it is a matter of general acceptance and knowledge that

public transport is not easily or readily accessible in Delhi.

13. That it is necessary to state that the respondents have not

at all considered the report on pollution as presented before

13

the Legislative Assembly on 01.12.2015 in which the

distribution of percentages for various causes of pollution

have been clearly mentioned. It clearly states that for long

term resolution of the problem the first step is to understand

the activities which cause pollution. That after

understanding the first step the second step is to take far

sighted and permanent steps in the direction to mitigate

causes of pollution. That several steps have been

suggested for all the 6 metropolitan cities. It is pertinent that

as per the report of Government of India Ministry of

Environment, Forest and Climate Change the pollution

caused by construction dust in the cities actually causes 22-

23% of the pollution. Further, it is a matter of common

sense that the vehicles which cause pollution shall be

causing pollution on both even and odd days. In order to

mitigate the cause of pollution the vehicles have to be

maintained in a way that they cause less pollution and

emissions whether with odd number or even number. A

copy of the minutes of the Lok Sabha dated 01.12.2015

concerning pollution are enclosed and marked as

Annexure – P-2 (colly).

14. That It is a matter of concern that the media reports made

by the respondents also carried the reports that

motorcycles/two wheelers shall be allowed to ply on all days

of the week. That it is a matter of grave concern that the two

14

wheelers have been known to cause more vehicular

pollution than four wheelers who are compliant with Bharat–

IV norms for their engines. Further as per report of Times of

India dated April, 14th 2013, two wheeler vehicles caused

most pollution in Bangalore. A copy of the report dated

14.4.2013 is enclosed and marked as Annexure – P-3.

15. That it is further submitted that curtailing the constitutional

rights of the citizens by following unreasonable and arbitrary

measures as is being done in the present case by the

respondents is only going to add to the chaos and shall not

actually uproot the actual causes of pollution from the city

which include pollution dust, entry of trucks inside the city of

Delhi and traditional ways of waste disposal in the city. It is

necessary to mention that the Eastern and the Western

Peripheral highways/ bypasses from where the trucks may

get a free run without actually entering into the city of Delhi

are still in the proposed stages and no action is being taken

in this regard. The respondents have failed to check the

main cause of concern of pollution in Delhi and are

targeting mercilessly and arbitrarily the helpless citizens of

this city.

16. That, it a matter of common knowledge that there are

several incomplete flyovers in Delhi which also cause

construction dust to fly into the city‟s air. Further, the

construction of metro line and its stations is also causing

15

construction dust to reach alarming levels in the city. These

concerns have not been addressed by the respondents in a

responsible manner at all. Further, the work of some of the

flyovers is stalled over political issues and the work is being

carried out at a very slow pace. That these factors can be

mitigated immediately by the respondents. It is surprising

that the respondents have not paid any attention to this side

of the spectrum for causes of pollution and have only

focused on a limited question of “private vehicular pollution”.

17. That simple measures which could have caused the

pollution to reduce in the city are better management of

traffic and traffic signals and their synchronization, and

better road construction technology in Delhi. That the

respondents who are incharge of managing the city traffic in

a more effective manner, have not been able to conceive

and devise ideas/ plans for decongestion of areas like the

Ashram Chowk, Pragati Maidan, Mathura Road, and Rao

Tula Ram Marg and other such similarly situated areas in

the city. That in case the vehicles can be allowed a free

passage through such points there shall be less pollution as

the vehicles shall spend less time on the road emitting

gasses through their ignition. It is pertinent that these

factors shall have to be worked out separately and require

resolutions and cannot be tackled by introducing an even

and odd number plying system in the city of Delhi. That the

16

conditions of roads in the city of Delhi is apathetic and they

are severally unmade roads in several parts of the city. That

the respondents have not made any inroads in improving

the infrastructure of the city and have decided to shrug

responsibility for the same by restricting movement and not

performing their part of the duty towards improving the city‟s

infrastructure. The road constructions and reconstructions

and their repairs are totally mismanaged. The repair works

starts immediately within a few weeks of the completion of

the road which becomes pathetic during rainy season.

18. That the factors which are actually causing pollution in the

city have been side lined and a peripheral issue like private

vehicles has been brought into the centre stage. It is

submitted that the solution and alternative to less number of

private vehicles on the road is not the increased number of

hours for metro railways or for that matter increasing the

number of buses in the city as both these solutions are not

suitable or advisable for a city which has peripheral satellite

towns which are feeder towns to the main city in terms of

both raw material as well as population/ manpower.

19. That the imposition of the impugned decision would lead to

rise in the prices of essential items because many four

wheelers would be unable to ply on alternate days. The city

may be deprived of even some of the essential items which

may include medicines also.

17

20. That the citizen of the city as reported by the media are

putting questions to themselves if they should own two cars

one with an even and another with an odd number of the

number plate as that appears to be the only plausible

solution to the irrational decision of the respondents or

change the number plates.

21. That in a city like Delhi simple measures like decongesting

the roads can cause far reaching consequences. In Delhi

the encroachments on the roads causes the maximum

number of traffic snarls and the same can easily be

mitigated by effective check by traffic police through honest

measures.

22. That it is a cause for grave concern that the respondents

have decided to implement a traffic plan which is being

implemented in the foreign cities of Beijing and Mexico

while those cities are differently placed and have different

problems and parameters. That the respondents have not

analyzed the situation of Delhi vis-à-vis those cities and

have also not exploited the other viable means for reducing

air pollution. The problems of incoming polluting trucks,

from other states is not a problem being faced by those

foreign cities. Further, the Constitutions of those countries

do not guarantee such rights to the citizens as in India. The

crime against women is also not at alarming levels in those

18

countries and the government has not failed in its duty to

provide public safety to its citizens.

23. That there are several other effective plans which may be

implemented keeping in mind the public interest of the

citizens e.g. having deferred or differential timings for

offices, courts, schools, colleges etc. The same shall help in

decongesting traffic snarls as well as per hour pollution

levels in any given area.

24. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar writ

petition before this Hon‟ble Court or before the Ho‟ble

Supreme Court of India.

25. That the present civil writ petition has been filed inter-Alia

on the following grounds.

GROUNDS

a) Because the fundamental right guaranteed under

section 14 of the constitution of India to the citizens of Delhi

is violated by the new traffic system being implemented

from 01.01.2016 by the respondents. The respondents have

failed to provide any plausible reason for the differential

19

treatment being meted to owners of four wheel vehicles in

Delhi. The respondents have miserably failed to explain any

reasonable differential to treat a certain class of citizens

with respect to particular vehicles differently than the others,

particularly when no statistics has been put forth by the

government or considered and determined by the

government as to which class of vehicles is causing the

maximum pollution, and without any such as statistics the

particular class of vehicles has been targeted by the

respondents. Besides that it has also not been determined

as to which cause is the basic reason for pollution and the

construction material causing pollution, bad roads, pollution

caused by incoming tracks from other states, non-taking of

sufficient mere is to provide pollution free centres in Delhi

and without providing service and mechanism and

measures to provide tree plantation and avoidance of

activities which cause pollution in Delhi including

management of dust, lack of timely cleanliness and other

such factors. The sudden action of the respondents would

cause chaos and total disturbance in Delhi.

b) Because the right to property which was initially

guaranteed as a Fundamental right was later on changed to

a constitutional right for the citizens of this country has been

violated by the impugned action because the very earning

source gets prohibited on alternate days. It is necessary to

20

note that to own a movable vehicle by any citizen of this

country is included in the “right to property”. Further, the

usage and purpose of owning and enjoying any property is

inbuilt in the guarantee of the constitution. Even the limited

restrictions which may be imposed are subject to judicial

review. The fact that a citizen would not be able to own the

property which he desires and put to his use for his purpose

is enough to be vilolative of Article 300A of the Constitution.

c) Because the right to freedom of movement

enshrined in the constitution can only be given effect when

there is no restriction put on the mode of commute and

transport through which freedom of movement can actually

be exercised. The right has been granted under article

19(1)(d),and (e) of the Constitution of India The

respondents are violating the provisions of the said articles

of the Constitution by the imposition restricted traffic

movements.

d) Because the points raised by the petitioner in the

writ petition clearly point out the nexus and connection

between the collective violation of constitutional and

fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 14, 19(1)(g), 21,

300 A of Constitution by way of imposition of a restriction on

movement of private vehicles by the respondents.

21

e) Because the chapter on Fundamental rights is

exhaustive and embodies within itself the restrictions which

may be imposed on the citizens of this country. Section 19

reads as under

“Article 19 - Protection of certain rights regarding

freedom of speech, etc.

(1) All citizens shall have the right-

(a) to freedom of speech and expression;

(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;

(c) to form associations or unions 7[or co-operative

societies];

(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;

(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of

India;1[and]

2[***]

(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any

occupation, trade or business.

[(2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect

the operation of any existing law, or prevent the

State from making any law, in so far as such law

http://www.manupatrafast.com/Search/dispsearch.aspx?nActCompID=16916&iPage=1&hText=#f7



22

imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the

right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests

of4[the sovereignty and integrity of India,] the

security of the State, friendly relations with Foreign

States, public order, decency or morality or in

relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement

to an offence.]

(3) Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause shall

affect the operation of any existing law in so far

as it imposes, or prevent the State from making

any law imposing, in the interests of4[the sovereignty

and integrity of India or] public order, reasonable

restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the

said sub-clause.

(4) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of the said clause shall



any law imposing, in the interests of4[the sovereignty

and integrity of India or] public order or morality,

reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right

conferred by the said sub-clause.

(5) Nothing in 5[sub-clauses (d) and (e)] of the said

clause shall affect the operation of any existing

law in so far as it imposes, or prevents the State





23

from making any law imposing, reasonable

restrictions on the exercise of any of the rights

conferred by the said sub-clauses either in the

interests of the general public or for the

protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe.

(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall



any law imposing, in the interests of the general

public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of

the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and,

in particular,6[nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect

the operation of any existing law in so far as it

relates to, or prevent the State from making any law

relating to,-

(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary

for practising any profession or carrying on any

occupation, trade or business, or

(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation

owned or controlled by the State, of any trade, business,

industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or

partial, of citizens or otherwise].”


24

That a perusal of the above would reveal that the restriction

imposed by the respondent has failed its test and is not

reasonable in any manner.

f) Because any action on the part of the executive or

legislature is bound to be struck down if the same is

violative of the provisions of the Constitution of India.

g) Because the grounds and contents of para VII as set out

prove a clear violation of the Fundamental and

constitutional Rights of the citizens of Delhi.

h). Because It is a matter of concern that the media reports

made by the respondents also carried the reports that

motorcycles/two wheelers shall be allowed to ply on all days

of the week. That it is a matter of grave concern that the two

wheelers have been known to cause more vehicular

pollution than four wheelers who are compliant with Bharat–

IV norms for their engines. Further as per report of Times of

India dated April, 14th 2013, two wheeler vehicles caused

most pollution in Bangalore.

i). That it is further submitted that curtailing the

constitutional rights of the citizens by following

unreasonable and arbitrary measures as is being done in

the present case by the respondents is only going to add to

the chaos and shall not actually uproot the actual causes of

25

pollution from the city which include pollution dust, entry of

trucks inside the city of Delhi and traditional ways of waste

disposal in the city. It is necessary to mention that the

Eastern and the Western Peripheral highways/ bypasses

from where the trucks may get a free run without actually

entering into the city of Delhi are still in the proposed stages

and no action is being taken in this regard. The respondents

have failed to check the main cause of concern of pollution

in Delhi and are targeting mercilessly and arbitrarily the

helpless citizens of this city.

j). Because it a matter of common knowledge that there are

several incomplete flyovers in Delhi which also cause

construction dust to fly into the city‟s air. Further, the

construction of metro line and its stations is also causing

construction dust to reach alarming levels in the city. These

concerns have not been addressed by the respondents in a

responsible manner at all. Further, the work of some of the

flyovers is stalled over political issues and the work is being

carried out at a very slow pace. That these factors can be

mitigated immediately by the respondents. It is surprising

that the respondents have not paid any attention to this side

of the spectrum for causes of pollution and have only

focused on a limited question of “private vehicular pollution”.

k). Because simple measures which could have caused the

pollution to reduce in the city are better management of

26

traffic and traffic signals and their synchronization, and

better road construction technology in Delhi. That the

respondents who are incharge of managing the city traffic in

a more effective manner, have not been able to conceive

and devise ideas/ plans for decongestion of areas like the

Ashram Chowk, Pragati Maidan, Mathura Road, and Rao

Tula Ram Marg and other such similarly situated areas in

the city. That in case the vehicles can be allowed a free

passage through such points there shall be less pollution as

the vehicles shall spend less time on the road emitting

gasses through their ignition. It is pertinent that these

factors shall have to be worked out separately and require

resolutions and cannot be tackled by introducing an even

and odd number plying system in the city of Delhi. That the

conditions of roads in the city of Delhi is apathetic and they

are severally unmade roads in several parts of the city. That

the respondents have not made any inroads in improving

the infrastructure of the city and have decided to shrug

responsibility for the same by restricting movement and not

performing their part of the duty towards improving the city‟s

infrastructure. The road constructions and reconstructions

and their repairs are totally mismanaged. The repair works

starts immediately within a few weeks of the completion of

the road which becomes pathetic during rainy season.

27

l). Because the factors which are actually causing pollution

in the city have been side lined and a peripheral issue like

private vehicles has been brought into the centre stage. It is

submitted that the solution and alternative to less number of

private vehicles on the road is not the increased number of

hours for metro railways or for that matter increasing the

number of buses in the city as both these solutions are not

suitable or advisable for a city which has peripheral satellite

towns which are feeder towns to the main city in terms of

both raw material as well as population/ manpower.

m). Because the imposition of the impugned decision would

lead to rise in the prices of essential items because many

four wheelers would be unable to ply on alternate days. The

city may be deprived of even some of the essential items

which may include medicines also.

n). Because the citizen of the city as reported by the media

are putting questions to themselves if they should own two

cars one with an even and another with an odd number of

the number plate as that appears to be the only plausible

solution to the irrational decision of the respondents or

change the number plates.

o). Because the submissions made under the facts as set

out in the body of the writ petition may also be taken as a

part of the grounds.

28

PRAYER

(a). Issue a writ order or direction including a writ of

mandamus or any other appropriate writ restraining

the respondents from enforcing the action/decision

made public vide press release dated 5.12.2015

(Annexure P-1) whereby the plying of the four

wheeler vehicles/cars with Odd/Even numbers on

alternate days on Delhi roads has been directed to

be imposed w.e.f. 1.1.2016 onward, and strike

down the said decision;

(b). Issue a writ order or direction including a writ of

mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing

the respondents to call for public debate before

enforcing the action/decision made public vide

press release dated 5.12.2015 (Annexure P-1)

whereby the plying of the four wheeler

vehicles/cars with Odd/Even numbers on alternate

days on Delhi roads has been directed to be

restricted/banned w.e.f. 1.1.2016 onwards;

(d). Issue a writ order or direction including a writ of

mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing

the respondents to enforce other measures for

taking corrective measures as suggested in the writ

29

petition for cleaning the polluted air of Delhi instead

of taking erratic, irrational and illogical policy

decisions;

(e). Grant any other relief as may be deemed fit and

proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

Place:New Delhi. (Shweta Kapoor),

Dated: 7.12.2015

Petitioner

Through

R.K. Kapoor Advocate

Ch. No. 119, New Lawyers‟ Chambers,

Bhagwan Dass Road,

New Delhi.

30


WRIT JURISDICTION


(Public Interest Litigation)

IN THE MATTER OF:





Versus

1.

The Govt. of NCT of Delhi,

Through its Chief Secretary, New

Secretariat, I.P.Estate, New Delhi

2. The Lieutenant Governor of Delhi,

Raj Niwas Marg, Delhi

…..RESPONDENTS

A F F I D A V I T

I, Shweta Kapoor, d/o Mr. R.K. Kapoor, aged about 31 years, r/o B-

2/14, S.J. Enclave, New Delhi-110029, do hereby solemnly affirm

and declare as under:-

31

1. That I am the Petitioner as above named. That the Petitioner

is an Advocate practicing mainly at the High Court of Delhi and

Supreme Court of India. The petitioner being an enlightened

citizen strongly believes in the Rule of Law and to see that

everybody and every institution abides by the Constitution and

respects its ideals and institutions and always encourages the

spirit of enquiry and reform. The present writ petition has been

filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus which has been

prayed for in the civil writ petition in the interest of Justice, rule

of law and in view of the law laid down by the Hon‟ble

Supreme Court of India. The petitioner can and is capable to

pay any cost if imposed by the Hon‟ble Court.

2. That I have filed the present writ petition as a Public Interest

Litigation.

3. I have gone through the Delhi High Court (Public Interest

Litigation) Rules, 2010 and do hereby affirm that the present

Public Interest Litigation is in conformity thereof.

4. I have no personal interest in the litigation and neither myself

nor anybody in whom I am interested would in any manner

benefit from the relief sought in the present litigation save as a

member of the General Public. This petition is not guided by

self gain or gain of any person, institution, body and there is

no motive other than of public interest in filing this petition. The

petitioner would be ready to pay the cost of the litigation if

imposed by this Hon‟ble court and has sufficient means to pay

32

the costs. The petitioner is an income tax payee and has a pan

number.

5. I have done whatsoever inquiry/investigation which was in my

power to do, to collect all data/material which was available

and which was relevant for this court to entertain the present

petition. I further confirm that I have not concealed in the

present petition any data/material/information which may

have enabled this court to form an opinion whether to

entertain this petition or not and/or whether to grant any relief

or not.

6. That the annexures annexed with the writ petition are true and

correct copies of documents taken from Internet/ media report.

7. That I have gone through and understood the contents of the

accompanying writ petition and state that the facts mentioned

therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and

the legal submissions made therein are based on legal advice

and believed by me to be true and correct.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

The Deponent verifies that the contents of the above affidavit

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that

nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this 07th day of December, 2015.

DEPONENT

33


WRIT JURISDICTION

C.M. No. of 2015

IN



IN THE MATTER OF

Shweta Kapoor, Advocate, ………..Petitioner

Versus

National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors. ….. Respondents

APPLICATION FOR STAY, ON BEHALF OF THE

PETITIONER, UNDER SECTION 151 CPC.

To

The Hon‟ble the Chief Justice of

Delhi High Court and His Companion

Judges of the High Court of Delhi.

The humble Petition

of the Petitioner above named

34

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. This Application has been filed in the accompanying writ

petition, has been preferred by the undersigned petitioner. The facts

and grounds stated therein are not being repeated herein for the

sake of brevity, the same may be read as part and parcel of the

present application.

2. It is submitted that the respondents are in the process of

presenting the new traffic scheme which has already been notified to

be implemented from 01.1.2016 during a press release in Delhi on

5.5.2015 before the police authorities and related authorities for

implementation persons. The implementation would cause …

3. That the change to be caused in the vehicular movement to be

made operational from 01.1.2016 is absolutely ill conceived and

shall affect the public of Delhi adversely. The plan has been

conceived and notified during a press release by the Chief Secretary

of Delhi Government Sh. K.K. Sharma on 05.12.2015.

4. That the present application is being preferred in order that the

subject modification/ change as conceived by the respondents in the

35

traffic vehicular movement of Delhi for private vehicles be not

implemented and be stayed by this Ld. Court.

5. That the petitioner thus prays for a stay of presentation of the

traffic modification vehicular plan as sought to be made operational

on 01.01.2016 be not enfoeced by the respondent through the Delhi

police and other civic agencies.

PRAYER

In the above facts and circumstances it is most respectfully

prayed that this Hon‟ble Court may be pleased to

(a). allow the present application and grant ex-parte ad interim

order of status quo on the vehicular movement in Delhi as it is at

present and also restrain the respondents from presenting any

scheme or plan before the Delhi Police and other civic agencies to

take steps to make the same operational.

(b). Grant any other relief as may be deemed fit and proper in the

facts and circumstances of the case;

Place:New Delhi. (Shweta Kapoor),

Dated: 7.12.2015

Petitioner

Through

R.K. Kapoor Advocate

36

Ch. No. 119, New Lawyers‟ Chambers,

Bhagwan Dass Road,

New Delhi.

37


WRIT JURISDICTION

C.M. No. of 2015

IN



IN THE MATTER OF:





Versus

1.

The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Through its Chief Secretary, New Secretariat, I.P.Estate, New Delhi

2. The Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, Raj Niwas Marg, Delhi

…..RESPONDENTS

A F F I D A V I T O F

Shweta Kapoor, D/o Sh. R.K Kapoor, R/o B-2/14 Safdarjung

Enclave, New Delhi -110029.

I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare

as hereunder:

38

1. That I am the petitioner in the above said petition and as such

am fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the

case.

2. That I have gone through and understood the contents of

the accompanying application and state that the statement

of facts made therein is true and correct to the best of

my knowledge received from various public sources and

media.

3. That the annexures annexed are true and correct

copies of their respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

The Deponent verifies that the contents of the above affidavit are

true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that nothing

material has been concealed therefrom.

Verified at Delhi on this 7th day of 2015.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT...

Documents

Transcript of IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT...