Delhi High Court refrains from passing order on PILs against odd-even scheme
Delhi High Court refrains from passing order on PILs against odd-even scheme
The high court will now hear the the five PILs filed by different individuals on December 22.

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday refrained from passing any order on a batch of petitions including one filed by a physically challenged man against AAP government's plan to impose the odd-even number plate formula for plying of private vehicles from January 1.

A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath said that the government is not going to implement their idea today or tomorrow and it is only on trial basis for 15 days. "We understand the urgency and we will hear you along with the batch of petitions already pending before this court," the bench said.

It will now hear the the five PILs filed by different individuals on December 22. One of the petitioners, Nipun Malhotra, who is physically challenged, urged the court to allow such commuters to use own vehicles as public transport is not disabled friendly. Gunjan Khanna, who commutes from Noida, said in her plea that there are no cycling lanes, if one wishes to move to more ecofriendly mode of transport.

Advocate Manoj Kumar, who filed joint PIL with Gunjan, said that the Delhi government should "call for public debate before enforcing the decision". "The government has done nothing to encourage the use of electric vehicles or use of hybrid cars in the last 10 years. The plan is less reformative and more chaotic in nature," the plea by activist Anit Kumar Bahutay said.

Earlier, the high court had refused to pass any interim direction on the PILs, saying, "Delhi government has proposed an idea, which is to be implemented from January 1, 2016, on trial basis for 15 days, let them (Delhi government) try it." Earlier, court's oral observation was made during hearing the PILs, filed by Shweta Kapoor and Sarvesh Singh, which sought directions for restraining implementation of policy.

One among the five petitioners claimed, "Imposition of such a policy/law would be contrary to public interest and has been imposed without any public debate or discussion and without understanding situation and facts and circumstances in India". It has also questioned whether the AAP government has the power to modify vehicular movement in the national capital.

What's your reaction?

Comments

https://umorina.info/assets/images/user-avatar-s.jpg

0 comment

Write the first comment for this!