Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2022

[Cites 12, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2022

This Report filed by the Special Commissioner, Sabarimala, regarding the functioning of Safe Zone Project, Sabarimala, by the Motor Vehicles Department was disposed of by the order dated 10.01.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1105 : CDJ 2022 Ker HC 203] with the directions contained in paragraph 120 of the said order. The 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner and the 3rd respondent State Police Chief were directed to file action taken reports before this Court on or before 01.07.2022, which was directed to be placed before the Bench on 11.07.2022. Registrar General was directed to forward a copy of the order dated 10.01.2022 to the Secretary, Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety, for information.

2. In the order dated 26.05.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 2906 : 2022 (4) KLT 934] this Court noticed that, despite the directions contained in the order dated 10.01.2022, the Enforcement Officers under the 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner and the Police Officers under the 3rd respondent State Police Chief are not taking earnest efforts to ensure strict enforcement of the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 2 SSCR No.20 of 2021 1989, the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017, taking note of the law laid down in the decisions referred to in the said order dated 10.01.2022. After the order of this Court dated 10.01.2022, in motor accidents involving contract carriages, the passengers in those vehicles and other road users sustained serious/fatal injuries. Since the use of contract carriages on public place, flouting the safety standards prescribed in AIS-008 and AIS-052 (Rev.1) 2008, etc. is posing potential threat to the safety of the passengers and other road users, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India was requested on 26.05.2022, to address arguments on behalf of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.

3. The orders of this Court dated 06.10.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 4898], 10.10.2022 and 14.10.2022 shall be read as part of this order.

4. In the orders dated 06.10.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 4898] and 10.10.2022, we noticed that, in view of the directions contained in the order dated 10.01.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1105], which was reiterated in the order dated 26.05.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 2906], the 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, through the Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department and the 3rd respondent State Police Chief, through the District Police Chief of the concerned Districts are duty bound to take necessary steps 3 SSCR No.20 of 2021 to prevent the use of contract carriages and other transport vehicles on public place, flouting the safety standards prescribed in AIS- 008/AIS-052 (Rev.1) 2008 and also the standards prescribed in relation to control of noise, etc. They are duty bound to take necessary steps to prevent the use of contract carriages and other transport vehicles on public place, exhibiting writings, advertisements, graphics, figures, etc. with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract carriage service, causing distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road; since use of such vehicles in public place, flouting the standards in relation to road safety, is likely to endanger the safety of the passengers of such vehicles and also other road users.

5. In the order dated 10.10.2022, we found that a total prohibition on the use of contract carriages violating the safety standards prescribed in AIS-008/AIS052(Rev.1) 2008 and also the standards prescribed in relation to control of noise, is highly essential since plying of such vehicles on public place is posing threat to the safety of the passengers in those vehicles, and also other road users. In the said order, we made it clear that, a mere removal of unauthorised fittings in a contract carriage, without completely removing the additional wiring and other alterations made in the bus body, passenger compartment and driver cabin cannot make that vehicle as one, which complies with the provisions under the Motor 4 SSCR No.20 of 2021 Vehicles Act and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder for the purpose of grant of Certificate of Fitness. The bus body, the passenger compartment and the driver cabin of that contract carriage will have to be maintained in the appropriate manner of its construction and maintenance, as per the statutory requirements in the Central Motor Vehicles Rules/Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules/AIS-008/AIS-052 (Rev.1) 2008, etc., and then only that vehicle can be treated as one which complies with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of Certificate of Fitness, which is the statutory mandate of sub-rule (1) of Rule 92 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rule and sub-rule (1) of Rule 249 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. Therefore, the Fitness Certificate of such a contract carriage has to be suspended with immediate effect, for a period of three months, within which time the owner of that vehicle can be directed to make that vehicle as one which complies with the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder, in all respects. After proper inspection, on being satisfied that the vehicle complies with the aforesaid requirements, in all respects, the competent authority can grant Certificate of Fitness to that vehicle. The driving licence of the driver who had driven such a contract carriage in public place has to be suspended for a period of three months, as per the statutory mandate of sub-section (2) of Section 190, which shall be forwarded 5 SSCR No.20 of 2021 to the licensing authority for disqualification or revocation proceedings, under Section 19 of the Act. Stringent action has to be taken against the owner and driver of contract carriages or other transport vehicles, which are used in public place after tampering with speed governor installed as provided under Rule 118 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules. Stringent action has also to be taken under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, once it is found that the contract carriages or other transport vehicles were driven by a drunken person or by a person under the influence of drugs.

6. As per clause (xviii) of sub-section (2) of Section 92 of the Motor Vehicles Act, a State Government may make rules for regulating the painting or marking of transport vehicle and display of advertising matters thereon, and in particular prohibiting the painting or marking of transport vehicles in such colour or manner as to induce any person to believe that the vehicle is used for the transport of mails. In exercise of the rule making power under the said clause, the State Government made Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, which deals with prohibition of advertisement or writing on vehicles; and Rule 264, which deals with paintwork or varnish.

7. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules provides that, no advertising device, figure or writing shall be exhibited on any transport vehicle, save as may be specified by the State or Regional Transport Authority by general or specific order, and 6 SSCR No.20 of 2021 on payment of the fee prescribed in sub-section (1), for a period of one year or part thereof for each vehicle. The Motor Vehicles Rules framed by other States contain provisions similar to Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. As per Rule 361 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, no advertising device, figure or writing shall be exhibited on any public service vehicle save as may be specified by the Regional Transport Authority or the State Transport Authority, as the case may be, by general or specified order. As per Regulation 26 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, which deals with bar on traffic impairment, unless validly permitted by the competent authority under the Motor Vehicles Act or the rules made thereunder, no driver shall display any advertisement on the vehicle.

8. In Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Kochi v. State of Kerala [2016 (3) KHC 693 : AIR 2016 Ker 187], in the context of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, this Court held that the said Rule provides for imposition of fee not only for advertisements, but also for figures or writings. After referring to the provisions under Rule 134 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, which deals with 'emergency information panel' for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods, this Court held that the writings contained in tanker trucks operated by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited by exhibiting its name in large and bold letters, even though has the characteristics of imposing 7 SSCR No.20 of 2021 with fee as prescribed under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, in view of the stipulations and prescriptions contained under Rule 134 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, are not liable to be imposed with fee for such writings made on the tanker trucks. However, this Court made it clear that, if any inscriptions or writings are made on such transport vehicles inviting public attention for the products of the petitioner company, Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules will come into play.

9. Section 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with grant of contract carriage permits. Section 84 of the said Act deals with general conditions attaching to all permits. As per clause (g) of Section 84, the name and address of the operator shall be painted or otherwise firmly affixed to every vehicle to which the permits relates on the exterior of the body of that vehicle on both sides thereof in a colour or colours vividly contrasting to the colour of the vehicle centred as high as practicable below the window line in bold letters. Similarly, the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules have to be legibly painted on every transport vehicle, save in the case of a motor cab or any motor vehicle belonging to the State or Central Government, on the left hand side of the vehicle, in English letters and numerals, each not less than two and a half centimetres square. In the case of educational institution bus and private service vehicle, Rule 291 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules 8 SSCR No.20 of 2021 provides that the name of the institution shall be written conspicuously at the top of the front and rear ends and on the left side of the body of the vehicle and the writings shall be horizontal.

10. Rule 264 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules deals with paintwork or varnish. As per Rule 264, the paintwork or varnish of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition and in accordance with the specifications, if any, laid down by the State or Regional Transport Authority. The Motor Vehicles Rules framed by other States contain provisions similar to Rule 264 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. As per Rule 326 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, every public service vehicle and all parts thereof, including paintwork or varnish, shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition and the engine mechanism and all working parts in reliable working order.

11. In Jijith and others v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (1) KHC 463] this Court found that the paintwork or varnish of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition, which is the mandate of Rule 264 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. If the State or Regional Transport Authority has laid down any specifications like uniform colour scheme, the paintwork of the transport vehicle shall be in accordance with that specifications. Any figure or writing exhibited on the transport vehicle, other than the name and address of the operator to be painted or otherwise firmly 9 SSCR No.20 of 2021 affixed as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the Motor Vehicles Act; the 'emergency information panel' provided under Rule 134 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods; the particulars enumerated in clauses

(a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, painted on the body of the vehicle; the name of the institution exhibited in educational institution bus and private service vehicle as per Rule 291 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; etc., falls within the scope of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. Any such figure or writing exhibited on the transport vehicle with an object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service of the operator will attract the provisions of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. The exhibition of writings and figures on vehicles by its very nature are intended to attract attention, which would cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles, cyclists and even pedestrians on the public road. Driver distraction is one of the major causes of road accidents, which is a situation where the attention of the driver is diverted to any other forms of activities, which may affect the concentration of driving activity as well as the safety of the passengers and others on public road. Earning of revenue by the State by the levy of fee under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules or generation of some additional income by the operator of the transport vehicle should not be at the cost of public safety. Therefore, this Court held 10 SSCR No.20 of 2021 that, exhibition of writings or figures with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service should not be permitted by levying fee under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules.

12. In Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463] this Court held that the paintwork of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition, as contemplated by Rule 264 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. While approving the matter intended to be exhibited on the vehicle, in exercise of the powers under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, the State or the Regional Transport Authority shall ensure that it does not cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. No approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191 shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the body of a transport vehicle, at places intended for exhibiting the name and address of the operator as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the Motor Vehicles Act; the 'emergency information panel' as per Rule 134 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; the name of the institution exhibited in educational institution bus and private service vehicle as per Rule 291 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; etc. In the case of a stage carriage in respect of 11 SSCR No.20 of 2021 which uniform colour scheme has been implemented under Rule 264 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, vide the decision of the State Transport Authority dated 04.01.2018, no approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc., over the three equally spaced white lines painted below the height of the wheel arch.

13. In the order dated 06.10.2022, we have reproduced a few screenshots of promotion videos/posts of contract carriages with writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the bus body, with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote their contract carriage service, which would cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles, cyclists and even pedestrians on the public road, openly flouting the statutory requirements and also the law laid down by this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463] and reiterated in the order dated 10.01.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1105] and the order dated 26.05.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 2906]. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463], a decision rendered on 21.12.2018, no permission under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules can be granted for the exhibition of writings, figures, graphics, etc. with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service, by levying fee. The law laid down in the said decision was being openly flouted by the contract and stage carriage operators. Two screenshots of contract carriages 12 SSCR No.20 of 2021 with writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the bus body, reproduced in the order dated 06.10.2022, are reproduced hereunder; 13 SSCR No.20 of 2021

14. On 14.10.2022, we have viewed in open Court a few screenshots from the video posted on 'YouTube' regarding removal of graphic stickers writings, figures, graphics, etc. pasted on the bus body of contract carriages. As evident from the screenshots reproduced hereinbelow, the exterior body of the contract carriages, which are painted in white colour, is wrapped with graphic stickers, openly flouting the law laid down by this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463] 14 SSCR No.20 of 2021 and reiterated in the subsequent decisions. Two screenshots are reproduced hereunder;

15. In the order dated 14.10.2022, we have noticed that, as pointed by the learned Special Government Pleader, most of these contract carriages were produced for testing for grant of certificate of 15 SSCR No.20 of 2021 fitness, without graphic stickers, unauthorized fittings, etc. After obtaining certificate of fitness, such vehicles are being used in public place, flouting the safety standards and other norms, after affixing graphic stickers and other materials, unauthorised lights, etc.

16. In the order dated 10.10.2022, we have reproduced a photograph that appeared in the Hindu daily dated 08.10.2022 of the employees giving final touches to a KSRTC bus for jungle safari from KSRTC Bus Depot at Sulthan Bathery to Ponkuzhy on the Kerala- Karnataka boarder through Kozhikode-Kollengal NH-766, which passes through the Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary. The said photograph is reproduced hereunder;

17. In Saji K.M. v. Deputy Transport Commissioner [2019 (3) KHC 836] this Court held that the law laid down by this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463] is equally applicable in the case of transport vehicles owned/operated by KSRTC and KURTC. While approving the matter intended to be exhibited on a transport vehicle 16 SSCR No.20 of 2021 operated by KSRTC or KURTC, in exercise of the powers under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, subject to the conditions, if any, laid down by the State Government under the first proviso to sub- rule (1) of Rule 191, the competent authority shall ensure that it does not cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. No approval shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the body of a transport vehicle owned/operated by KSRTC or KURTC, at places intended for exhibiting the name and address of the operator as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the Motor Vehicles Act; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; the reflectors and reflective tapes as per Rule 104 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules. Similarly, in view of the provisions under Rule 100 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [(2012) 5 SCC 321] and Avishek Goenka (2) v. Union of India [(2012) 8 SCC 441], tampering with the percentage of visual transmission of light of the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows of transport vehicles owned/operated by KSRTC or KURTC, either by pasting any material upon the safety glass or by fixing sliding 'cloth curtains', etc. are legally impermissible. No approval under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, 17 SSCR No.20 of 2021 graphics, etc. on the safety glasses of such transport vehicles, which shall always be maintained in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than that prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 100 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules.

18. In Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836] this Court noticed that the provisions under 'Policy on Roadside Advertisements' formulated by the Indian Road Congress, vide IRC:46-1972 was introduced when it was noticed that advertisement can often distract the attention of drivers of motor vehicles and in that case a public hazard or nuisance. They may also obstruct the view of the drivers of fast moving vehicles and are then a public danger. Para.2 of IRC:46-1972 deals with advertisement control; Para.3 deals with principles on advertisement control; etc. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways vide Circular No.RW/NH-33044/35/2001/S&R(R) dated 16.05.2002 has made it clear that no advertisement hoardings are permitted on National Highways within the Right of Way (ROW) except informatory signs of public interest such as hospitals, bus stations, etc. or advertisement of temporary nature announcing local events such as Mela, Flower Show, etc. Besides, IRC:46-1972 titled 'A Policy on Roadside Advertisements' published in 1972 should also be referred for comprehensive guidelines on advertisement control on National Highways.

SSCR No.20 of 2021

19. In Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836] this Court noticed that the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways in its letter No.F.No.RW/NH-33044/18/ 2016/S&R(R) dated 07.09.2016 noticed that despite the Ministry's policy of not allowing roadside advertisements, hoardings on National Highways, which cause distraction and is also one of the causes of accidents on National Highways, advertisement hoardings have generally been noticed along the National Highways. Therefore, it was decided that the Regional Officers/Engineering Liasoning Officers within their jurisdiction shall inspect the National Highways by prioritising heavily traffic National Highways and other National Highways in stages and submit inspection reports to the Ministry for further necessary action, along with their monthly reports. However, reports from the Regional Officers/Engineering Laisoning Officers are not being received by the Ministry and therefore, the Ministry vide letter dated 07.09.2016 directed all the implementing agencies and Regional Officers/Engineering Liasoning Officers to do joint inspection of all National Highways within their jurisdiction and sent a consolidated report regarding advertisement hoardings to the Ministry for further necessary action. A copy of the said letter is addressed to all Engineers-in-Chief and Chief Engineers of Public Works Departments of State/Union Territories dealing with National Highways and other Centrally Sponsored Schemes.

SSCR No.20 of 2021

20. In Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836], after taking note of the provisions under 'Policy on Roadside Advertisements' formulated by the Indian Road Congress, vide IRC:46-1972, the circular and letter issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and also the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules made thereunder, this Court held that, since transport vehicles owned/operated by KSRTC and KURTC are regularly plying on National Highways, such vehicles shall not be permitted to exhibit any advertisements which are likely to distract the attention of other drivers. Earning of additional income by KSRTC or KURTC by the display of advertisements on their transport vehicles, under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, should not be at the cost of public safety.

21. In Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836] this Court held that, as per the mandate of sub-rule (1) of Rule 92 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, no person shall use or cause or allow to be used in any public place any motor vehicle which does not comply with the provisions of Chapter V of the said Rules (which deals with construction, equipment and maintenance of motor vehicles). Therefore, the Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department and also the Police have to take necessary action against the vehicles owned/operated by KSRTC and KURTC which are used in public place after tampering with the percentage of visual transmission of light of 20 SSCR No.20 of 2021 the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows of such vehicles, either by pasting any material upon the safety glass or by fixing sliding 'cloth curtains', etc. Action shall also be taken for exhibiting advertisements, figures, etc. causing distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. In the said decision, this Court held further that, in view of the provisions under sub-rule (1) of Rule 92 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, the law laid down by the Apex Court in Avishek Goenka [(2012) 5 SCC 321] and Avishek Goenka (2) [(2012) 8 SCC 441], and also the law laid down by this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463] no motor vehicle, including a Government vehicle, shall be allowed to be used in any public place, after tampering with the percentage of visual transmission of light of the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows, either by pasting any material upon the safety glass or by fixing sliding 'cloth curtains', etc. As per the mandate of sub-rule (2) of Rule 100 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, the safety glass of the windscreen and rear window of every motor vehicle shall always be maintained in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than 70% and that of the safety glass used for side windows is not less than 50%.

22. In the order dated 14.10.2022, we have reproduced the screenshot of a transport vehicle owned/operated by KURTC exhibiting advertisements, figures, etc. causing distraction to the drivers of other 21 SSCR No.20 of 2021 vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. The said screenshot is reproduced hereunder;

23. In the order dated 01.08.2022 in D.B.P.No.36 of 2022, we have ordered that depending upon the number of pilgrims, KSRTC shall provide additional buses for Nilakkal-Pamba chain service for Sabarimala pilgrims, in order to ensure that the number of passengers carried on each vehicle does not exceed the permitted passenger capacity (including standing capacity, if any). In the said order, we have made it clear that, the use of any transport vehicle, which does not comply with the provisions of Chapter V of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, is posing potential threat to the safety of the passengers and other road users. The directions contained in our order dated 10.01.2022 in SSCR No.20 of 2021 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1105] have to be complied with by KSRTC/KURTC, while operating their services, in order to ensure the safety of the 22 SSCR No.20 of 2021 passengers and other road users. The Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department and the Police shall take stern action against the operation of any transport vehicle by KSRTC/KURTC flouting the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra.

24. The learned Standing Counsel for the additional 14th respondent KSRTC would submit that steps have already been taken to remove graphic stickers on KSRTC vehicles for Jungle Safari. The learned Standing Counsel seeks time to get instructions and file an affidavit on behalf of the said respondent.

25. In the order dated 14.10.2022, we have made it clear that, the Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department and also the Police have to take necessary action against the vehicles owned/operated by KSRTC and KURTC which are used in public place after tampering with the percentage of visual transmission of light of the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows of such vehicles, either by pasting any material upon the safety glass or by fixing sliding 'cloth curtains', etc. Action shall also be taken for exhibiting advertisements, figures, etc. causing distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road, flouting the statutory provisions referred to hereinbefore and also the directions contained in the judgment of this Court in Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836].

SSCR No.20 of 2021

26. On behalf of the additional 14th respondent KSRTC, its Managing Director shall file an affidavit explaining the facts and circumstances, in which vehicles owned/used by KSRTC/KUSRTC were used in public place openly flouting the law laid down by this Court in Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836], a decision rendered on 09.04.2019, the orders in SSCR No.20 of 2021 and also the order dated 01.08.2022 in D.B.P.No.36 of 2022.

27. In the order dated 14.10.2022, we have reproduced the screenshots taken by a vlogger by name 'Tigoons', who has uploaded a video on Sri.Ajay Ettumanoor, in 'You Tube'. Sri.Ajay, who owns 'AJ Graphics' at Ettumanoor, has done graphics in more than 1,000 contract carriages, including the vehicle of another vlogger by name 'E bull jet'. The screenshots taken from the video posted by another vlogger by name 'Technic Youtuber' of a vehicle bearing KL-73/B-777 of the vlogger 'E bull Jet', in which the image of the High Court building is also shown and the same is reproduced in paragraph 39 of that order. Paragraphs 38 to 40 of that order read thus;

"38. A vlogger by name 'Tigoons' has uploaded a video on Sri.Ajay Ettumannoor, in 'YouTube'. Sri.Ajay, who owns 'AJ Graphics' at Ettumannoor has done graphics in more than 1,000 contract carriages, including the vehicle of another vlogger by name 'E bull jet'. The images of the contract carriages and other vehicles in which Sri.Ajay has done extensive graphic work are shown in that video. A screenshot taken from that video is reproduced hereunder;

24 SSCR No.20 of 2021

39. Another vlogger by the name 'Technic Youtuber' posted a video in 'YouTube' of a vehicle bearing registration number KL- 73/B-777 of the vlogger 'E bull Jet'. In the said post, the image of the High Court building is also shown, along with the image of the said vehicle by the name 'Nepoleon E bull jet'. The said vehicle, which was fitted with unauthorised lights, fittings, graphics, etc., was booked by the Enforcement Officers of the Motor Vehicles Department. The said vehicle was produced before the concerned Magistrate Court. A screenshot taken from that video uploaded in 'YouTube', after the order of this Court dated 10.01.2022 [2022 SCC OnLine Ker 1105], is reproduced hereunder;

25 SSCR No.20 of 2021

40. The 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, through the concerned Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department, shall take stern action, in accordance with law, against the vloggers who are using such vehicles in public place, posing threat to the safety of other road users, and also against the vloggers who promote such vehicles with unauthorised alternations, and also those who do such unauthorised alternations on motor vehicles."

28. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463], a decision rendered on 21.12.2018, no permission under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules can be granted for the exhibition of writings, figures, graphics, etc. with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service, by levying fee. The law laid down in the said decision was being openly flouted by the contract and stage carriage operators, which is evident from the screenshots of contract carriages with 26 SSCR No.20 of 2021 writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the bus body, reproduced hereinbefore at paragraph 13, and also the screenshot reproduced in the order dated 14.10.2022 (reproduced hereinbefore at paragraph

27) of Sri.Ajay, who owns 'AJ Graphics' at Ettumannoor, who has done graphics in more than 1,000 contract carriages, including the vehicle of another vlogger by name 'E bull jet', bearing registration number KL-73/B-777, which is not even a transport vehicle, which is fitted with unauthorised lights, fittings, graphics, etc.

29. In Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [2012 (5) SCC 321] the Apex Court held that the Central Motor Vehicles Rules deal with every minute detail of construction and maintenance of a vehicle. In other words, the standards, sizes and specifications which the manufacturer of a vehicle is required to adhere to while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with under the Rules. What is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. It would neither be permissible nor possible for the Court to read into these statutory provisions, what is not specifically provided for. The provisions of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules demonstrate the extent of minuteness in the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of vehicles, but also the safety of other users of the road. In the said decision, the Apex Court held further that, the 27 SSCR No.20 of 2021 legislative intent attaching due significance to 'public safety' is evident from the object and reasons of the Motor Vehicles Act, the provisions of the said Act and more particularly, the rules framed thereunder.

30. As per Regulation 26 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017, which deals with bar on traffic impairment, unless validly permitted by the competent authority under the Motor Vehicles Act or the rules made thereunder, no driver shall display any advertisement on the vehicle. Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules provides for imposition of fee not only for advertisements, but also for figures or writings. See: Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. [2016 (3) KHC 693]. Rule 191 has application only to transport vehicles. As held by the Apex Court in Avishek Goenka [2012 (5) SCC 321], what is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from the Rules. Therefore, there is a total prohibition of advertisements, figures, writings, etc. on the body of a motor vehicle other than a transport vehicle.

31. Today, when this matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Special Government Pleader has made available for the perusal of this Court a report dated 20.10.2022 of the 2 nd respondent Transport Commissioner, furnishing the details of the special drive 'Operation Focus-3'. As per that report, during the period from 07.10.2022 till 16.10.2022, 8556 cases were detected. In 448 cases, 28 SSCR No.20 of 2021 the fitness certificate of the vehicle was cancelled and in 14 cases, the certificate of registration was either cancelled or suspended. 169 driving licenses are also suspended. The details of the compounding fee imposed and collected are also furnished in that report.

32. The learned Special Government has made available for the perusal of this Court copy of the communication dated 21.10.2022 of the Transport Commissioner, addressed to all Deputy Transport Commissioners, Regional Transport Officer, Enforcement Regional Transport Officers and Joint Regional Transport Officers and another communication dated 21.10.2022 addressed to the Chairman & Managing Director of KSRTC, the Managing Director of KURTC and the Managing Director of KSRTC-SWIFT to ensure strict compliance of clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules in respect of all transport vehicles. The said communications are issued pursuant to the direction contained in paragraph 45 of the order of this Court dated 14.10.2022. As per Rule 93, the following particulars in respect of every transport vehicle shall be exhibited on the left hand side of the vehicle in English letters and numerals, each not less than two and a half centimetres square legibly painted either on a plane surface of the vehicle or a plate or plates affixed to it;

(a) the name and address in brief of the registered owner;

(b) the unladen weight of the vehicle;

(d) the gross vehicle weight of the vehicle and the registered axle weight pertaining to the several axles thereof;

(e) if the vehicle is used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers solely or in addition to goods, the number of passengers for whom accommodation is provided;

      (f)     the name of the insurer with whom the vehicle is
              insured; and
      (g)     the date of expiry of the permit and the date of
              expiry of the certificate of fitness.

33. Paragraph 48 of the order of this Court dated 14.10.2022 reads thus;

"48. The learned counsel for additional respondents 8 and 9 and also the learned counsel for additional respondents 10 to 12 would submit that the Tourist Bus Operators in the State may be granted reasonable time to comply with the requirements of the uniform colour code for contract carriages introduced in the state based on the decision of the State Transport Authority. The learned Special Government Pleader would submit that the said decision of the State Transport Authority is under challenge before this Court in W.P.(C)No.32719 of 2022, in which the learned Single Judge declined today (14.10.2022) the interim relief seeking time to comply with the requirements of the uniform colour code for contract carriages."

34. Today, during the course of arguments, the learned Special Government Pleader would point out that, the order dated 14.10.2022 30 SSCR No.20 of 2021 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.32719 of 2022, declining interim relief seeking time to comply with the requirements of the uniform colour code for contract carriages was under challenge in W.A.No.1502 of 2022. That Writ Appeal ended in dismissal, by the judgment dated 19.10.2022 of the Division Bench.

35. We have issued various directions in the orders dated 06.10.2022, 10.10.2022 and 14.10.2022 and 20.10.2022, whereby the 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, the 3rd respondent State Police Chief and also to the additional 6th respondent Union of India, represented by the Secretary (RT&H), Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, were directed to take necessary steps to ensure that motor vehicles flouting the safety standards and the standards prescribed in relation to control of noise are not used in public place, posing threat to the safety of the passengers of such vehicles and other road users.

36. The Deputy Solicitor General of India was directed to get instructions. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) would submit that he is awaiting instructions from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, i.e., additional respondents 6 and 7, on the action that can be initiated against the vloggers and also vehicles brought through Carnet with extensive modifications, alterations, etc. Immediately upon receipt of written instructions, an affidavit on behalf of additional respondents 6 and 7 shall be placed on record. 31 SSCR No.20 of 2021

37. In the order dated 14.10.2022, we have noticed that various vloggers are posting videos and posts on online media, like, 'YouTube' regarding 'bus body code' and also 'colour code' applicable to contract carriages. In the said order, we have reproduced three screenshots taken from a video posted by 'Focus Body Builders', Kottappady, of a vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-06/H-1411, which is fitted with unauthorised lights in the bus body, driver cabin and also passenger compartment, flouting the safety standards Rule 286 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, AIS-008, AIS-052(Rev. 1) 2008, though the bus body is painted in white colour. Three screenshots taken from a video posted by 'Focus Body Builders', Kottappady, are reproduced hereunder;

SSCR No.20 of 2021

38. By the order dated 14.10.2022, we have directed the 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, through the concerned Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department, to conduct inspection of vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-06/H-1411 and thereafter, initiate appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law, 33 SSCR No.20 of 2021 against the registered owner and also the body builder, taking note of directions contained in the order of this Court dated 10.01.2022, which is reiterated in the order dated 26.05.2022.

39. In the order dated 14.10.2022, we have noticed the submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader that a three-tier system has been evolved by the Motor Vehicles Department for detecting violations by motor vehicles, including contract carriages, stage carriages, etc. As per the report dated 20.10.2022 of the 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, during the period from 07.10.2022 till 16.10.2022, 8556 cases were detected. In 448 cases, the fitness certificate of the vehicle was cancelled and in 14 cases, the certificate of registration was either cancelled or suspended. 169 driving licenses are also suspended.

40. The 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, through the Enforcement Officers in the Motor Vehicles Department shall ensure that colour photographs of the exterior body, passenger compartment, driver cabin and also light and light-signalling devises and retro reflectors as per the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, AIS-008/AIS-052 (Rev.1) 2008, etc., forms part of the proceedings granting/declining the certificate of fitness to every transport vehicle.

41. Having considered the materials on record and also the submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader, we deem it appropriate to direct the 2nd respondent Transport 34 SSCR No.20 of 2021 Commissioner or, in his absence, the officer holding charge of Transport Commissioner, to appear in person before this Court on 28.10.2022 at 3.00 p.m., in order to explain the circumstances in which contract carriages and other transport vehicles, including vehicles owned/used by KSRTC/KUSRTC, were granted certificate of fitness after the decision of this Court in Jijith [2019 (1) KHC 463], a decision rendered on 21.12.2018/Saji K.M. [2019 (3) KHC 836], a decision rendered on 09.04.2019, and permitted to be used in public place, openly flouting the safety standards and the standards prescribed in relation to control of noise, and also the law laid down by this Court in those decisions, posing threat to the safety of the passengers of such vehicles and other road users. The 2nd respondent shall also explain the action, if any, taken against the owner and driver of the motor vehicles referred to in the orders dated 06.10.2022, 10.10.2022, 14.10.2022 and 20.10.2022, and also against the vloggers referred in those orders.

List on 28.10.2022 at 3.00 p.m. Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

                                                       P.G. AJITHKUMAR,
                                                             JUDGE
       dkr




21-10-2022                    /True Copy/                             Assistant Registrar

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court