Supreme Court: State Must Be Impleaded When Relief is Sought From Public Exchequer  ||  SC: Student Fees Cannot Be Increased Mid-Course Except in Exceptional Circumstances  ||  Supreme Court: ED's Delay in Sending Arrest Order Does Not By Itself Invalidate Arrest  ||  Supreme Court: Appeal Limitation Runs From NCLAT Order Pronouncement, Not Certified Copy Receipt  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Tribunal Has No Supervisory Authority Over Waqf Board  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Aadhaar Fingerprint Comparison to Trace Sreekrishnapuram Murder Culprits  ||  Delhi High Court: Unnatural Death at Police Station Alone Cannot Establish Police Negligence  ||  Orissa High Court: Teacher Scolding Student for Intoxicant Use is Not Suicide Abetment  ||  Supreme Court: Drug Users are Victims and Focus Must Be on Breaking the Supply Chain  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Signatories May Join Arbitration When the Dispute Affects Their Rights    

Shweta Kapoor and Ors. v. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (11 Jan 2016)

Delhi High Court refusal to interfere in ‘odd-even’

MANU/DE/0045/2016

Motor Vehicles

In most other decisions the High Court’s refusal to interfere with government policy on its merits and possible alternatives may seem mundane, but it meant the continuation (and natural termination) of the curious (but effective?) ‘odd-even’ vehicle scheme in Delhi. The Court accepted the noble pollution-reducing motives of the policy, its limited lifespan and sufficiency of exemptions, from a detailed analysis of the Delhi government notification. It found no cause to adjudge the “pilot project” unconstitutional, arbitrary or irrational since it was founded on expert knowledge.

Relevant : BALCO Employees' Union Vs. Union of India MANU/SC/0779/2001 Section115 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Act

Tags : DELHI   ODD-EVEN   VEHICLE RESTRICTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved