Allahabad High Court
Aklesh Kumar Dwivedi vs State Of U P And 8 Others on 8 February, 2019
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AFR Court No. - 21 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 250 of 2019 Petitioner :- Aklesh Kumar Dwivedi Respondent :- State Of U P And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Singh,Shivam Yadav,Uma Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
This public interest litigation has been instituted by the petitioner for the following reliefs:
"I) To issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to immediately remove the speed breakers from public road which runs from Babhnauti to Ismaila which is also connecting road to the National Highway.
II) To issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to immediately issue directions to install the glow sign boards showing the warning signals so as to avoid the accident.
III) To issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the District Magistrate of District Bhadohi to set up a team and hold an enquiry in the matter and also to take immediate action against the persons who have illegally constructed the speed breakers over the public road."
The petitioner is a farmer. He claims that he is also engaged in doing social work. His grievance is that on the link road to the National Highway which connects Babhnauti Ismaila to Sabalpur, some local residents have made speed breakers illegally and unauthorizedly. The said road belongs to Public Works Department1. These speed breakers have been raised without prior permission from the PWD and in original plan of the PWD in respect of said road there was no speed breaker. It is stated that said road does not cater any school or hospital hence the speed breakers have been constructed without any justification. It is averred in the writ petition that a complaint has been made to the Executive Engineer, PWD but no action has been taken by the authority concerned. A representation has also been submitted to the District Magistrate in Janta Darbar which has also failed to elicit any response. The petitioner has brought on record some photographs of the speed breakers. The public interest litigation also highlights absence of any road sign indicating speed breakers. It is stated that two-wheelers are most prone to the accidents and a large number of accidents are taking place due to these unsigned speed breakers.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a large number of speed breakers in the town concerned which are causing health hazard and inconvenience to the citizens. He further submits that similar speed breakers have been constructed by the Public Works Department and Local Bodies in all over the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention to tentative Guidelines on the provision of speed breakers for control of vehicular speeds on minor roads. A copy of the said guidelines is taken on record. From a perusal of the guidelines it is evident that the Indian Road Congress had requested the University of Roorkee for drafting guidelines based on spot studies of suitable speed breakers. The University of Roorkee had submitted a draft which was considered by the Traffic Engineering Committee of the Indian Road Congress. The Traffic Engineering Committee was comprised of experts on the subject. After considering said report, the Indian Road Congress has issued the Guidelines. Relevant part of the guidelines is extracted below:
"2.3. Yet, there may be cases, particularly on secondary/ tertiary roads and on residential streets in urban areas, where certain physical constraints may become necessary for effecting control on vehicular speeds. In this regard, three types of devices, namely, speed breakers, rumble strips and width restrictions have been used successfully. Choice among these will depend on local factors such as the type of area traversed, the type and volume of traffic, the extent of speed reduction desired, and other local factors. However, speed breakers, in particular, are meant mainly for residential areas, minor roads, and similar situations. Their use on major inter-city roads outside urban areas is not considered a good engineering practice, and the Indian Roads Congress does not favour it.
2.4. Speed breakers, where permitted to be installed, provide visual, audible and tactile stimuli which alert drivers and cause them to slow down. These can have different heights, lengths, spacing, signs, etc. In fact, no particular design is suitable for all the types of vehicles using the road. For example, a speed breaker designed for trucks can be dangerous to motor cyclists and one designed for motor cyclists will be ineffective for trucks. The design recommended herein is a compromise design to suit average Indian road traffic conditions and is based on field investigations and research.
2.5. Speed breakers are not intended as substitute for proper mandatory, warning or informatory signs but are meant only to draw attention of drivers to a possible hazard ahead."
The guidelines further show that ideally designed speed breakers/ hump should satisfy the following requirement:
"3. Definition ... ... ... ...
(i) There should be no damage to vehicles nor excessive discomfort to the drivers and passengers when passing at the preferred crossing speed.
(ii) The hump should not give rise to excessive noise or cause harmful vibrations to the adjoining buildings or affect the other residents of the ares.
(iii) Above the design speed, a driver should suffer increasing level of discomfort (but without losing directional control and without any vehicle damage) depending on the extent through which design speed is exceeded."
As per the guidelines the use of speed breakers is justified under the following circumstances:
"4. Scope 4.1 Warrants ... ... ... ...
(1) T-intersections of minor roads with rural trunk highways, characterised by relatively law traffic volumes on the minor rod but very high average operating speed and poor sight distances. Such locations have a high record of fatal accidents and as such a speed breaker on the minor road is recommended;
(2) Intersections of minor roads with major roads, and mid-block sections in urban areas where it is desirable to bring down the speeds;
(3) Selected local streets in residential areas, school, college or university campuses, hospitals, etc. Also in areas where traffic is observed to travel faster than the regulated or safe speed in the area.
4.2. Other places where these may be used include :
(1) Any situation where there is a consistent record of accidents primarily attributed to the speed of vehicles e.g. when hazardous sections follow a long tangent approach;
(2) Approaches to temporary diversions;
(3) Approaches to weak or narrow bridges and culverts requiring speed restriction for safety;
(4) On the minor arms of uncontrolled junctions and at railway level crossings;
(5) Sharp curves with poor sight distances; and (6) Places of ribbon development, where road passes through buit-up areas and vehicles travelling at high speeds are a source of imminent danger to pedestrians."
The guidelines also provide design, placement, sign posting and marking of speed breakers. It provides that the driver should be warned about speed breakers by posting suitable advance warning signs.
Our attention has also been drawn to a document compiled by the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Government of India2. Facts gathered by the Transport Ministry give details of the accidents caused due to several reasons. In the said document, marked as annexure-1, there is National Highway-wise details of accidents caused due to speed breakers. The Ministry is now discouraging construction of speed breakers in National Highways and in this regard several circulars are issued from time to time. In Lok Sabha on 9.2.2017 a question was raised regarding road accidents caused due to speed breakers. The relevant part of the answer furnished by the Hon'ble Minister of Road Transport and Highways reads as under:
"(c) Ministry is discouraging construction of speed breakers on National Highways. Several circulars are issued in this regard from time to time the latest being No. RW/NH-33037/01/2016/S&R (R) dated 29.08.2016. However, unauthorized speed breakers are sometimes constructed by local people. They are removed as and when they are brought to the notice of road authorities."
In annexure no.1 the number of fatalities caused due to speed breakers during 2014 and 2015 have been compiled. The number of accidents in 36 States are 11008 in 2014 and 2015 each year. The extract, showing number of fatalities in some of the States including State of Uttar Pradesh reads as under:
S.No. States/ UTs Number of fatalities due to speed breakers during 2014 Number of fatalities due to speed breakers during 2015 1 2 3 4 1 Bihar 729 348 2 Karnataka 1114 2310 3 Madhya Pradesh 1895 2109 4 Maharashtra 380 576 5 Uttar Pradesh 3192 1654 6 West Bengal 225 483 7 Delhi NR 41 The aforesaid table indicates that the highest number of accidents, due to speed breakers, have occurred in Uttar Pradesh. In the year 2014 total number of accidents were 3192, and 1654 occurred in 2015.
It appears that in the year 2015, number of accidents have shortly come down due to change of policy of the Central Government to discourage the construction of speed breakers on National Highways. The figure of the accidents in Uttar Pradesh only refers to the accidents which have taken place on National Highways. A large number of speed breakers have been constructed on State Highways and link roads. It appears that no data has been compiled in respect of accidents which are taken place on State Highways and the link roads.
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India has issued a communication dated 29.8.2016 addressed to all the Chief Secretaries of the State Governments and other functionaries for removal of speed breakers raised on National Highways. The said circular reads as under:
"Please refer to the Ministry's circular no. RW/NH-33037/01/2016/S&R (R) dated 11-04-2016 reiterating the Ministry's policy that speed breakers should not be constructed on National Highways as these defeat the basic objective of providing an obstruction free high speed facility, apart from being a safety hazard. The circular recommended provision of properly designed rumble strips at places like approaches to sharp curves on level crossings, congested or accident prone locations etc. where control of speed on National Highways is unavoidable. It was also highlighted that rumble strips are being provided indiscriminately and thus directed that the location of such rumble strips shall be approved by Chief Engineer (National Highways)/ appropriate authority in NHAI/NHIDCL who will satisfy himself of the requirement. A copy of such approval letters shall be endorsed to the respective Regional Officer of the Ministry. Further, it was requested that the position of removal of speed breakers and approval of location of rumble strips on National Highways should be intimated to the Ministry by 20th April, 2016.
2. However, it has been observed that performance reports by implementing agencies are not being received by the Ministry. It should be noted that the issue of speed breakers and road safety factor associated with it has been raised in several public grievances, RTIs, Parliament question etc. It is of great concern and all the Project Zones and RO's and ELO's of the Ministry are hereby directed to coordinate with the implementing agencies and send consolidated reports on the position of removal of speed breakers and approval of location of rumble strips on National Highways without further delay.
3. This may be accorded the highest priority."
The issue of speed breakers has also been considered by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmadabad in the case of Kumudben Sureshchandra, Decd. thro' Heirs Sureshchandra and others v. Jamnagar Municipal Corp.3. This case was slightly in different context but the issue with regard to speed breakers was also considered by the High Court and it was observed that under Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 19494, it is the duty of the Corporation to maintain all streets within a city and the Corporation Act does not provide any provision for erecting speed breakers. Relevant part of the judgment reads as under:
"16. Under Chapter XIV of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (BPMC Act, for short), all streets within a city are public streets. Public street is defined in the BPMC Act and reading section 203 of the Act, it is very clear that the Municipal Corporation has to construct, maintain and improve the streets. The Municipal Corporation, therefore, was under an obligation to maintain the streets in such a way so as not to cause any obstruction to the traffic, and to maintain safety. In the instant case, by erecting a speed breaker, which is not provided under any law, and that too unscientifically, the Corporation has done not only an unauthorised act, but negligent too, which has resulted in the death of the deceased."
Similar issue was considered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of J.P. Sanghi and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another5. The Court after considering the provision of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and the Municipal Corporation Act, came to hold as under:
"10. As discussed above, it is clear that so far as we are concerned, there is no provision in either the Highway Act or the Motor Vehicles Act or in the Municipal Corporation Act providing for the construction of road humps or speed breakers. It is also clear that as it appears from the observations in Halsbury's Laws of England, there some regulations have been framed but unfortunately we have no regulations also. It was contended by learned counsel for the parties that in the scheme of the Motor Vehicles Act under Section 91 the power has been conferred on the State Government to frame rules and Sub-clauses (i) and (j) of this section bring this matter within the scope of Section 91 and it is open to the State Government to frame rules for road humps or speed breakers as and when they are thought necessary to achieve the purpose indicated in Sub-clause (i) or Section 91 of the Motor Vehicles Act and it was contended that this Court should issue direction to the State Government to frame rules."
The Bombay High Court in the case of Kewal Semlani v. Commissioner of Bombay and others6, has considered the recommendation made by the Indian Roads Congress and has issued the following directions:
"14. The Indian Roads Congress has also given specification for speed breakers. According to it, speed breakers are laid by first marking the location of hump on the pavement and marking indents in this area for proper bonding. Surface is then cleared for all dust and loose particles and a tack coat applied. Forms of requisite heights, shape and width are then placed, and hot premixed bituminous material is poured to the required depth and shape. Forms are then lifted and the surface finished to required shape and edges rounded by trowel. The premixed material should be well compacted before opening to traffic. Allowance should be made for compaction, and irregularities should be corrected using bituminous materials having fine aggregate or by scrapping, as necessary. The material is then allowed to cure before opening to traffic. The guidelines provided by the Indian Roads Congress have to be implemented strictly. Consequently we direct:
(i) That in the entire State of Maharashtra henceforth all the speed breakers constructed shall be in accordance with the specification indicated in the guidelines given by the Indian Roads Congress. All other speed breakers which are not in consonance with the guidelines shall be demolished and new speed breakers be constructed strictly in accordance with the guidelines and with the prior approval of the police.
(ii) The drivers shall be warned of the presence of the speed breakers by posting suitable advance warning signs.
(iii) Speed breakers should be painted with alternate black and white bands to give additional visual warning. For better night visibility, it is desirable that the markings are in luminous paint/luminous strips. Embedded cat-eyes can also be used to enhance night visibility.
(iv) The Director General of Police, Maharashtra State, to give instructions" to Police Commissioners and Superintendents of Police of urban and rural areas in the entire State so as to ensure that the speed breakers are not constructed without their permission and the speed breakers are to be constructed in consonance with the guidelines provided.
(v) The Director General of Police and concerned Municipal Commissioners/ Councillors in charge of Municipal Corporations/Councils to ensure that the offending speed breakers are demolished and new speed breakers are constructed in consonance with the guidelines provided by the Indian Road Congress.
(vi) The National Highways Authority shall also abide by the guidelines provided for them by the Indian Roads Congress within the State of Maharashtra."
It is evident from the law laid down by the High Courts of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Bombay that recommendation of the Indian Road Congress has been considered at length by the aforesaid High Courts and have issued necessary directions for its compliance.
Our experience shows that a large number of speed breakers have been installed in most of the cities of State of Uttar Pradesh. In Allahabad (now Prayagraj) also huge speed breakers have been installed in total disregard to the recommendation of Indian Roads Congress and the directions issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India. In its communication dated 29.8.2016, as discussed above, the Chief Secretaries have been directed for removal of speed breakers raised in the National Highways. We do not find any justification for not extending these guidelines to State Highways also.
A large number of accidents also occurs due to speed breakers which have not been properly installed. It appears to us that the State Government has not issued any order/ circular in conformity with the recommendation of the expert committee, Indian National Roads Congress and the directions issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.
The issue with regard to proper installation of the speed breakers came to be considered before other High Courts also which we have discussed in foregoing paragraphs of this judgment. We see no reasonable ground why the judgments of other High Courts should not be adopted in this State also. Regard being had to the fact that density of population in State of U.P. is much higher than State of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat, therefore, in this State, installation of speed breakers strictly in conformity with the expert opinion, is more necessary than any other State. As is evident from the chart detailed above, the highest number of accidents occurred due to speed breakers during 2014 in the State of U.P. where 3192 persons lost their lives.
It is apposite to mention that fatal accidents occur due to speed breakers in night when the roads are deserted and a bit careless/ negligence of two wheeler riders and drivers of four wheeler result in fatal accidents. Such accidents also occur due to lack of proper warning signs/ light as provided under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules therein. We find that the directions issued by the Bombay High Court in Kewal Semlani (supra) can be implemented in the State of Uttar Pradesh also without any impediment.
Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for the parties on the issue involved in this petition, we issue following directions:
(i) Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, U.P., Lucknow shall circulate the guidelines of Indian Road Congress to all Municipal Commissioners/ Executive Officers, National Highway Authorities for compliance of the guidelines and issue necessary directions to concerned authorities for erection of speed breakers in terms of specifications indicated in the guidelines given by the Indian Road Congress and the circulars issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India. The existing speed breakers which are not in consonance with the recommendations/ guidelines issued by the Indian Road Congress, be demolished and the new speed breakers be constructed strictly in accordance with the guidelines and with prior approval of the District Magistrate;
(ii) The Director General of Police, U.P. shall issue instructions to the Senior Superintendents of Police/ Superintendents of Police of Districts and Deputy Superintendents of Police of Urban and Rural Areas in the entire State to ensure that speed breakers be not constructed without permission of the District Magistrate and the speed breakers be constructed in consonance with the guidelines provided by Indian Road Congress;
(iii) The Authorities concerned shall put advance warning signs at suitable places to warn the drivers of the presence of speed breakers. The speed breakers should be painted with alternate black and white bands to give additional visual warning. For better night visibility, it is desirable that the markings are in luminous paint/ luminous strips. Embedded cat-eyes can also be used to enhance night visibility.
The public interest litigation shall be listed on 4.10.2019. The Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, U.P., Lucknow is directed to submit a compliance report on or before 4.10.2019.
Office is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the Principal Secretary, P.W.D., U.P., Lucknow for its compliance.
Order Date :- 8.2.2019 Digamber