The petitioner sought an order directing the State to facilitate testing of E-rickshaws under the exempted category under Rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and to frame a registration policy. The court dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
| Noting by Officer or Advocate |
Serial No. |
Date | Office notes, reports, orders or proceedings With signature |
|---|---|---|---|
| WP(C) 837 of 2017 B E F O R E THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA 22.09.2017 Heard Mr. K. Sinha, the petitioner-in-person. The reliefs, as urged by this petition are for sending the sample of E-rickshaws having variations of nomenclature to the authorized agency under Rule 126 of the Central Vehicles Rules such as Automatic Research Association of India for testing before granting the registration under the exempted category as defined under sub rule (u) of rule 2 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. It has been further urged that the State- respondents be directed to frame a policy/rule to grant registration (exempt category) under sub rule (u) of rule 2 read with rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. This court is of the view that the reliefs as prayed are not germane to the jurisdiction of this court and without any substance. Moreover this court cannot interfere in the domain of the policy making of the State- respondents. That apart, according to this court the rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules is a self contained rule for purpose of testing and no further direction is required. In view of this, this writ petition having devoid of merit is dismissed. Dismissal, however shall not create bar for the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil court of the competent jurisdiction. Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appears for the Union of India- respondent and Mr. J. Majumder, learned counsel appears for the respondent No.2. JUDGE |
Saikat
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can direct State respondents to frame a policy for exempted registration of E-rickshaws.
Whether Rule 126 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 requires further directions for testing samples.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner-in-person
State
Union of India
S. Talapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
