NEW DELHI: Striking a balance between ownership rights and anti-pollution measures, the Delhi high court Tuesday ordered the release of “end of life” vehicles seized for scrapping under two conditions while imposing several riders.
Hearing petitions by owners who claimed that their vehicles (more than 10-year-old diesel or over 15-year-old petrol) were sent for scrapping without any notice, Justice Prateek Jalan asked the transport department to release these vehicles if owners gave necessary undertakings.
“In the present batch of cases, vehicles have been seized while parked in public places on the understanding that parked vehicles are ‘deemed to be plying’… There is controversy on whether vehicles parked in public space – particularly on streets proximate to owners’ residences – can be covered within the definition of ‘plying’,” the court observed.
The HC said the intention of the ban on end-of-life vehicles was not to scrap the cars but to ensure that the capital is pollution free.
You aren’t a schoolteacher, HC raps transport official
Delhi High Court on Tuesday said there was “dissonance” between the stand of the Delhi government and a senior transport official over the scrapping of parked end-of-life vehicles and termed this “unfortunate”.Justice Prateek Jalan said that the order by the transport commissioner on the seizure of such vehicles was “misconceived” and directed the government to frame a policy for the release of the vehicles. “Is impounding necessary when cars are being taken out of the city? Does the commissioner have power to issue such a direction? You don’t have authority to do so. There is no legal standing to this. It is completely illegal,” he observed.Special commissioner Shahzad Alam, in response, said the seized cars should not be released and blamed petitioners for having an “afterthought” of sending the cars out of Delhi. He said the department has powers under orders of National Green Tribunal, Supreme Court and Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to scrap the vehicles. He opposed the petitions that said a message signalling deterrence must be issued.
“Mr Alam, we are not in the business of sending messages…. This is not a dictatorship and you are not a schoolteacher. One has to have a balance. You have not given any notice that you will seize the parked cars. What difference does it make if it is an afterthought as long as they are willing to send the vehicles outside Delhi?” Justice Jalan asked.
The court said the official was making submissions “contrary to what the minister is saying” and that directions were required as no notice was issued by the government after CAQM directions that indicated seizure of vehicles.
“It is pointed out by standing counsel Sameer Vashishth that the transport minister has by an order noted that this office memorandum (OM) has been issued without approval of the government and expressed his concern about seizing of vehicles parked outside houses of owners…. Issuance of OM in exercise of powers under Delhi Motor Vehicle Rules, 1993, seems to be misconceived as rule 2(d) doesn’t vest any specific power in the commissioner to issue OM,” it said. A detailed order is awaited.
The judge saw merit in Alam’s apprehension that the vehicles may be back on the road and cause pollution.