High CourtsDivision Bench

Birendra Kumar Pegwal vs District Magistrate, Dehradun & Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 5 March 2019 · Citation: (2019) 03 UK CK 0022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ · N.S. Dhanik, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011 — Rule 173, 174, 174(1)
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (PIL) No. 162 Of 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 818 words

Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ

1.

The application to condone the delay, in preferring the review application, is not opposed and the delay is, therefore, condoned.

2.

This application is filed seeking review of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPPIL No. 162 of 2018 dated 26.10.2018.

3.

A writ petition was filed in public interest regarding large scale illegal and unscientific mining of rivers, being carried out in the river beds of rivers Song, Suswa and Jakhan, contending that mining can only be carried out upto a depth of 1.5 meters, whereas mining operations were being carried on by digging up land upto 10 to 15 meters with the help of machinery; these operations were being carried on clandestinely during night, and tractors were also being deployed to carry the RBM; and storage was being carried out in contravention of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963. The Division Bench issued the following directions:-

(i) District Magistrate, Dehradun, is directed to ensure that no illegal, illicit and unscientific mining is carried out in the river beds of rivers Song, Suswa and Jakhan.

(ii) District Magistrate, Dehradun, and the Mining Officer of the concerned area are directed to ensure that the depth of 1.5 meters, as prescribed in the rules, is maintained while carrying out mining operations.

(iii) District Magistrate, Dehradun, is also directed to ensure the RBM is not carried in tractors. Tractors are primarily meant for agriculture pursuits and not for transportation. There shall be complete ban on transportation of RBM in tractors. All the tractors involved in carrying RBM are ordered to be seized by the District Magistrate.

4.

The present application is filed by owners of tractors aggrieved by the directions issued by the Division Bench that RBM is not carried on tractors, as tractors are primarily meant for agricultural uses, and not for transportation. Our attention is drawn by Shri Dharmendra Bharthwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, to Rule 173 and 174 of Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011. Rule 173 stipulates that no tractor shall draw on a public road, a trailer exceeding half a ton in weight unladen and fitted with solid steel wheels less than 60 centimeters in diameter. Rule 174 (1) stipulates that no trailer manufactured in India, and intended to be used as a transport vehicle, shall be registered unless its design has been approved by the Transport Commissioner in accordance with the provisions of the other sub-rules of Rule 174.

5.

From the affidavit of Shri S.A. Murugesan, District Magistrate, Dehradun dated 15.02.2019, it is evident that, as per the Notification dated 05.11.2004, Tractors meant for agricultural purposes and power trailers were categorized as 'non-transportation vehicles', and power trailers and tractors which were carrying public goods were categorized as 'transportation vehicles'; trucks, dumpers and tractor trolleys/trailers, which were duly registered with the office of the Regional Transport Office, were being permitted, by the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation, for transportation of minor minerals from the lots allotted to the said Corporation only; however, as at present, in compliance with the Court's order dated 26.10.2018, transportation of minor minerals, through tractor-trolley, was being prohibited.

6.

The petitioner's complaint, in this review application, is that the Division Bench had erred in proceeding on the premise that all tractors, with attached trailers, were to be used only for agricultural purposes; on fulfillment of certain conditions, certain tractors attached with trailers/trolleys were also registered as transportation vehicles; and, since the entire basis for prohibiting the use of tractor trolleys is that these tractors are to be used only for agricultural purposes, the order of Division Bench necessitates review. It is evident from Rules 173 and 174 (1) that certain trailers attached to tractors are also used as transport vehicles, under certain circumstances, provided they are registered as such with the office of Regional Transport authority.

7.

In the light of the averments in the counter affidavit, and in as much as trucks and other light motor vehicles are being permitted to transport Minor Minerals, the order under review is modified to the limited extend that tractors with attached trolleys-trailers, duly registered with the office of the Regional Transport Officer, and which were hitherto being permitted by the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation, and the Uttarakhand Forest Corporation for transportation of Minor Minerals from the allotment lots of the corporation, shall only be permitted to transport such minerals strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions imposed both by the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and the Uttarakhand Forest Corporation. Only such of the tractor cum trolleys, which are registered with the office of Regional Transport Office as transportation vehicles, shall be permitted to transport Minerals from the allotted lots of both the Corporations subject to such conditions as may be imposed both by the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and the Uttarakhand Forest Corporation. The Review Applications are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.