A Division Bench of J&K High Court Srinagar Wing Comprising Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur directed Divisional Commissioner Jammu to ensure that no roadside parking shall be allowed except at the Opposite City Square Mall; Opposite LIC Office Panjtirthi Jammu; Maharaja Hari Singh Park; Opposite Chief Engineer Office, (P.H.E) B. C. Road; v) Prem Nagar Road Upto Jogi Gate and Opposite Ganpati Food Junction, Gandhi Nagar.
DB further directed Commissioners of Jammu/Srinagar Municipal Corporation, shall ensure that no pavements/ footpaths and roads are allowed to be used for operating any kind of business including the “Theka Rehris” except in spots designated by JMC.
During the course of hearing, Division Bench observed that in our previous order we had requested the Chief Secretary of the J&K, to explore the possibility of handing over the evacuee property premises land falling behind the Advocate General’s Office for its use as parking space by the High Court. Nothing has come on record in this behalf. We feel constrained to observe that the High Court complex also feels the difficulty of not having the proper parking space/ area to cater to the demand. The complex houses the CRPF company as well who are utilizing a sizeable portion of the area for its use. Besides the number of lawyers, the staff of the High Court as well as of the Advocate General are all required to be accommodated which requires availability of additional space, therefore, bearing in mind the possibility of utilizing the Evacuee Property Land, the Court had made the request on the above lines. We once again request the Chief Secretary to ensure the transfer of the above described property for its use in the public interest. The needful shall be done by the next date and compliance filed.
While considering the matter Division Bench noticed that in terms of order passed on 23.12.2005, the High-Level Committee was directed to be constituted headed by the Chief Secretary of the Jammu and Kashmir to monitor effectively the mechanism in vogue for regulating the traffic movement in the whole of J&K. We reiterate the direction and seek compliance from the Chief Secretary.
When the PIL Came-up for hearing Division Bench observed that in terms of order dated 4th February, 2020, upon consideration, certain directions had been passed by this Court on three issues and the respondents, Principal Secretary to the Government, Transport Department, J&K; Divisional Commissioner, Jammu; Inspector General of Police (Traffic), J&K; have filed their compliance.
DB further observed that the compliance report submitted by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Transport Department, in nutshell, is based on three points, first, deals with the switching of vehicles from Petrol/ Diesel into CNG saying that the issue has not been resolved so far as the establishment of Gas Pipeline has not been finalized to provide infrastructure for mounting conversion from diesel/ petrol vehicles to CNG; second is only the reiteration of the earlier status report submitted on the issue of ‘complete ban on 15-25 year old commercial vehicles’ and thirdly, the compliance talks of the steps having been take for making the E-Rickshaws operational in the Union Territory of J&K.
The status/ compliance report submitted previously by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Transport Department, in terms of order dated 18.12.2019 read with order dated 30.12.2019, has been responded to by the Amicus Curiae, wherein it is stated that the respondent was not justified in showing his inability to comply with the direction directing the Government of Jammu and Kashmir to ensure placing before the court the policy by amending the existing norms in respect of registration of vehicles both public and private by incorporating a condition in the registration norms to the effect that the owner of the vehicles seeking registration has a parking space/ garage space at his residence, as the Section 137 and 138 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, provides powers of Central and State Governments to make the Rules and it was within the powers of the Government to make rules aimed at the prohibit the use of pavements by the motor vehicles and for regulating the management of parking places.
DB directed Principal Secretary to the Government, Transport Department, shall respond to the response submitted by the Amicus Curiae by the next date of hearing.
DB further observed that the compliance report submitted by the Divisional Commissioner, Jammu, details out the existing parking spaces/ proposed parking spaces and the on-road parking slots made available for the general public. It also highlights the measures under consideration for streamlining the traffic management and further observed that the Court had desired on the previous hearing viz. 04.02.2020 to extend the directions passed in this petition to the Jammu province also, but the Sr. AAG, Mr B. A. Dar, had sought some time to gear up the machinery and to undertake a trial before actually implementing the directions on ground so that the populace is not taken by surprise. With such assurance of the Sr. AAG, the court had deferred extending the directions to the Jammu province as well. The report placed before us, submitted by the Divisional Commissioner, Jammu, nowhere details out the preparedness or of any drill having been undertaken by the authorities for the implementation of the directions to the Jammu region as well.
Division Bench after perusal of the compliance report submitted by the Inspector General of Police reveals that the officer has undertaken an exhaustive exercise on the issue and has highlighted the hiccups faced by his department in regulating the free flow of traffic besides suggesting certain important measures required to be taken for achieving the objective.
Division Bench gone through the report and feel that the suggestions putforth by the officer are of vital importance and would bring in lot of ease in the flow of traffic in case the same are implemented on ground. In that view of the matter, we adopt the suggestions made by the Inspector General of Police (Traffic), J&K, and made the same part of the order. Registry shall send a copy of the report submitted by the Inspector General of Police (Traffic), J&K, to all the concerned, who shall, file their compliance accordingly by or before the next date of hearing.
DB while taking note of the compliance reports submitted by the authorities supra, we see no report filed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, as regards the direction contained in paragraph no. 6 of the order dated 4th February, 2020, whereby the respondent had been directed to ensure that the 28 identified sites, figuring in Category B of his compliance report, are developed with promptitude after following the due procedure of law and to identify more sites for parking of vehicles in the left out areas of Srinagar City and rural areas. The compliance be filed on the next date without fail.
DB further observe dthat there is no compliance on behalf of Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar, also vis-à-vis taking steps for procuring the 50 Digital Time Recording Machines for monitoring of parking intervals. Let the officer remain present in person on the next date to explain the reasons of non-compliance.
During the course of proceedings the Amicus submitted that the issue of road-side parking was highlighted by the Union Transport Minister also in one of his addresses which was published by many newspapers of the country stressing that a provision is required to be added in the existing laws to take care of the menace of roadside parking.
DB observed that Amicus while emphasizing the importance of the availability of parking space at the residence of the individual seeking registration of his vehicle, submitted that many minor incidents have turned into major casualties in the congested areas of the J&K as the vehicles parked on the road play a bottleneck in any rescue mission initiated in such situations. The Amicus submitted that even the medical evacuation in the night time gets impossible because of such road blockage.
DB further observed that this court, while dealing with the issue, had also mulled on the idea of having a provision in the existing law that would keep the registration of every new vehicle subject to the availability of parking space/ garage with the person seeking such registration, however, the respondent, Principal Secretary to the Government, Transport Department, expressed his complete disability to do so saying that the power is vested with the Central Government. Taking the inability of the Government of J&K, as expressed by the Principal Secretary, into consideration, we deem it proper to implead the Union Secretary, Ministry of Surface Transport, Government of India, as party in this PIL and seek his response on the said point. Accordingly, the Union Secretary, Ministry of Surface Transport, Government of India, is impleaded as party in the array of respondents. He shall figure as respondent no. 9. Notice on asking is waived by Mr T. M. Shamsi, ASGI. He shall file his response, on the above lines, by the next date of hearing.
M/s Manzoor Ahmad Dar, and Javed Iqbal, Advocates, appearing on behalf of some of the aggrieved submit that the directions passed in terms of order dated 4th February, 2020, as regards the parking places has not been implemented and that the direction is being misunderstood by the authorities. The court had very unambiguously directed that the amount, as suggested by the Divisional Commissioner, to be charged on hourly and daily basis shall be enhanced and regulated after following the codal formalities. However, we clarify that the hourly parking charges, as suggested by the Divisional Commissioner at the designated places, taken note of in the order dated 04.02.2020, shall remain at Rs. 30/- per hour and the day parking charges shall be Rs. 100/-. It is further directed that the respondents shall ensure that there are proper signboards displayed at the parking slots reflecting the day parking and hourly parking separately alongwith the charges applicable thereon. This direction shall hold good for the roadside parking allowed by this Court in paragraph no. 7 of the order dated 04.02.2020. The Digital Time Recording Machines for monitoring the parking intervals shall be ensured to be in place for effective implementation of the directions. JNF