Delhi High Court Issues Notice On Plea Against Unauthorized E-Rickshaws/ Autos Plying In National Capital

The Delhi High Court today issued notice on a PIL filed by an auto-rickshaw driver, concerned by the number of illegal autos and e-rickshaws plying on the roads of national capital, leading to traffic jams and increased pollution.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh has fixed the case for hearing on February 4, 2022.

The petition is filed by one Ajit Kumar, claiming to be the owner of a three-seater auto rickshaw vehicle, through Advocate Vishal Khanna.

It is averred therein that there are about 22,000 unauthorized autos and 52,280 unlicensed e-rickshaws are presently plying on Delhi roads. In this backdrop, it is stated that the recent decision of the Delhi Transport Authority to invite fresh applications for e-auto should not be implemented until the already existing unauthorized vehicles are removed. 

It is pointed out that the Supreme Court had in the case of MC Mehta v. Union of India, vide order dated 11.11.2011, fixed a cap of 1 lakh auto permits for CNG variant in Delhi. Out of 1 lakh, the petitioner claims, the Transport Authority has already issued 95,000 permits and reserved more than 4,200 for E-Autos in a bid to encourage adoption of electric vehicles.

It is contended,

"Going beyond from the above said CAP of One Lakhs permits or going beyond like relying on any other fuel will be considered as the violation against the orders passed by Hon'ble Apex Court...incase the new permits for E-Auto are allowed then the new vehicles will fuse in the already overcrowded population of Auto TSR and will continue to ply and thereby continue polluting the NCR area."

It is thus prayed that any further action on the new applications may be taken only after removal of aforesaid 22,000 unauthorized autos and 52,280 unlicensed e-rickshaws plying on Delhi roads.

Advocate Abhishek Gupta appeared for the Petitioner. Advocate Satyakam appeared for Delhi government.

Case Title: Ajit Kumar v. GNCTD