SC: Subsidy Taxability Depends on its Purpose under The Income Tax Law  ||  MP HC:Revenue Authority’s Decision Can’t Operate as Res Judicata in Absence of Express Statutory Bar  ||  SC: Breakup Followed by Suicide does not Automatically Amount to Abetment to Suicide  ||  SC: Election Petition under Representation of the People Act Must be Filed Personally by Petitioner  ||  Patna HC: Template Arrest Memo cannot Satisfy Mandate under Article 22 of Constitution  ||  MP HC: Delayed Cruelty FIR not Counterblast When Wife “Remains Silent” to Save her Married Life  ||  MP HC:Revenue Authority’s Decision Can’t Operate as Res Judicata in Absence of Express Statutory Bar  ||  Patna HC: Signature Mismatch alone cannot Prove OMR Tampering  ||  J&K&L HC: Bail can be Set Aside if Contrary to Statutory Mandate  ||  Kerala HC: Headmistress’s Churidar cannot Bar Entry, Clothing Choice is A Fundamental Right    

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