Allahabad High Court Quashes ARTO's Order Banning Registration Of E-Rickshaw, E-Auto In Mathura & Agra

Essentially, the ARTO Mathura, issued a notification on November 07, 2023, under Rule 178 of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1998, banning registration of e-Rickshaws and e-Autos in Mathura and Agra on account of their mushroom growth causing incessant traffic jams.

It may be noted that Rule 178 of the 1998 Rules empowers the Superintendent of Police within a Municipal Corporation, Municipality or Nagar Panchayat and a Registering Authority in other areas within their respective jurisdiction to pass orders restricting the speed of or prohibiting the use of motor vehicles, generally or a class of vehicles in any area or road by way of publishing the notifications in Official Gazette.

The Petitioners in the case challenged the notification on grounds that a blanket ban on the registration of new e-Rickshaw and e-Auto is violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

In the counter affidavit, as noted by the Court, it was submitted that e-rickshaw operators are flouting traffic rules and often move arbitrarily and are overloaded or used as goods carriers. It was stated that “14748 E-Rickshaws, 12346 Three-wheeler CNG Auto- Rickshaws and 695 total e-autos are operating and that more than 105 E-Rickshaw Dealerships are operating in Mathura.”

The Court held that Rule 178 provides speed restrictions and prohibits the use of vehicles. However, it does not contemplate any restriction on the registration of new vehicles, so the ban on registration was without jurisdiction.

The bench, comprising Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Jayant Banerji, held that though the restrictions were sought to be placed in the public interest, the counter affidavit did not support the notifications. The Court observed that in the counter affidavit, the respondent authority had highlighted its failure to control the traffic and, consequently, the law and order situation.

“In case the situation is getting out of hand, nothing prevents the legislature or the rule making authority from bringing about suitable enactments/amendments in the existing statute or the rules framed therein to achieve the desired objectives which is also the mandate of Article 19(2) of the Constitution. However, the situation howsoever bad, cannot empower the authorities to exercise power or jurisdiction which they do not possess under the existing law or the rules.”

The Court held that an order passed without jurisdiction cannot be sustained based on the apprehensions and incapacity of the respondent authorities. Accordingly, the notification and consequential order banning the registration of new e-rickshaws and e-autos was quashed.

Case Title: Shree Vindavan Auto Sales v. State of U.P. along with connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 279 [WRIT - A No. - 69 of 2024]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 279