Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal, Holds Investigating Officer Cannot Create Evidence  ||  Supreme Court: NDPS Prosecution Cannot Be Quashed Solely Over Co-Accused’s Disclosure  ||  SC: Tax Classification Depends on Goods' Form at Sale, not their End Use  ||  Delhi High Court: No Material Showing Delhi Police Compromised the 2020 Riots Probe  ||  Madras HC Suggests Mandatory Attachment of Properties Suspected to Be Proceeds of Corruption  ||  P&H High Court: Demolition After Lawyer Flagged Corruption Appears Aimed at Silencing Him  ||  Calcutta High Court: Contempt Proceedings Cannot Be Used to Challenge Orders or Attack Judges  ||  Orissa High Court: Marriage Need Not Be Preserved When the Relationship Has Substantially Eroded  ||  SC: CIRP Can Continue Despite Fraudulent Insolvency Plea That Triggered It  ||  Delhi HC: Senior Citizen May Seek Eviction of Daughter-in-Law for Ill-Treatment    

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