- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Supreme Court dismisses petition seeking strict action against manufacturers/users of Hybrid Rickshaws
Supreme Court dismisses petition seeking strict action against manufacturers/users of Hybrid Rickshaws The Supreme Court of India (SC) dismissed a petition that sought immediate action against manufacturers and users of hybrid rickshaws, made using old parts of the different automobiles, mainly decrepit scooters, & pedal rickshaws, used to carry goods and people The petition was...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Supreme Court dismisses petition seeking strict action against manufacturers/users of Hybrid Rickshaws
The Supreme Court of India (SC) dismissed a petition that sought immediate action against manufacturers and users of hybrid rickshaws, made using old parts of the different automobiles, mainly decrepit scooters, & pedal rickshaws, used to carry goods and people
The petition was listed before the SC and a Bench headed by Justice RF Nariman refused to entertain the plea saying, "Heard the petitioner appearing in person. We find no merit in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed."
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by Anshul Gupta (petitioner), the petition mentioned that many hand driven vehicles are being fitted with outdated, country-made engines and running on biofuels like petrol.
Hybrid vehicles also known as jugaads, are rickshaws made using old parts of the different automobiles, mainly decrepit scooters, and pedal rickshaws, used to carry goods and people. These hybrid vehicles are freely running throughout India that are not safe. Hence, the petitioner sought immediate action against the manufacturers and users of hybrid vehicles.
The petition further reads, "In continuation of such practice, people have modified their two-wheelers, especially motor-bike, to carry heavy loads. They have removed the back tires of the vehicle and fitted a trolley with it. It's a clear violation of the use of a motor vehicle. As these automobiles are not made for such purpose, using them like this is a threat to both the environment and people walking on roads."
The plea stated that "These vehicles don't possess any permission like pollution certificate, insurance, etc. But they move on city roads unchecked. There is no category for the driving license which permits a person to drive such vehicles. Such vehicles are increasing day by day."
The petitioner showed concern that these hybrid vehicles harm the environment and these are unsafe as they are not very sturdy as made of old parts of vehicles. It further states that these vehicles do not go through the pollution checks measures as well.
The Top Court dismissed the petition stating that there is no merit in it.