M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13029 OF 1985

M.C. Mehta …Petitioner(s)

Versus

Union of India & Ors. …Respondent(s)

ORDER

Deepak Gupta, J.

Modern conveniences bring with them their own problems. One

of the most important conveniences of the industrial age is motor

transport. This has brought with it many problems but we may

highlight only two:­ (1) pollution and (2) parking space. It is the

problem of parking which we seek to address in this order.

2. A vehicle, whether be it a motor car, bus, three­wheeler, scooter

or a small scooty, transports one or more individuals from one place to

the other. Once passengers /occupants of the vehicles have been

taken to their destination, the vehicle in question has to be parked. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA

This requires a lot of space, a lot of planning, a lot of infrastructure Date: 2019.09.06 16:57:08 IST Reason:

and a lot of money. The tendency of individuals is to save as much 2

money as possible and not pay anything for parking.

3. Till the late 1970s motor cars were the prerogative of the rich.

Most people who could afford motor cars lived in houses with drive­

ways and garages. But as the economy of the country has improved

and the earning capacity of people has risen there are more and more

vehicles on the road. At the same time due to paucity of space and the

astronomical rise in land prices the size of dwelling houses has

become smaller and smaller. The biggest casualty in this conflict

between increasing number of cars and dwindling availability of land

is “parking space” for vehicles. Even in those houses which had

garages, these were converted to rooms utilised for other purposes.

Then cars started getting parked in drive­ways but as the number of

members of the households expanded, from drive­ways the cars have

now spilled over to the roads outside the house. This is not the only

problem. The municipal authorities, for reasons best known to them,

without carrying out any study with regard to the carrying capacity of

the colonies/areas/towns/cities/metropolises are permitting

additional constructions including additional floors in these colonies.

Setbacks are being decreased or abolished. The constructed area is

rising vertically and horizontally. Resultantly where, about 50 years

ago, there was a single storey house with one family and one car, there 3

is now a four storey­ structure, if not higher with may be 8 flats and

16 cars if not more. This has created many problems and one of the

most serious problems is that of parking.

4. The Golden Rule is “Love thy neighbour”. Today the social fabric

of neighbourhoods is being torn asunder because of fights over this

most petty issue of parking of vehicles. Therefore, we feel there is a

need to pass a detailed order on a mundane issue like parking

because this may impact town planning. Proper parking policies will

also lead to less pollution, less crime and a better and more dignified

life which every citizen is entitled to under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India.

5. Before dealing with the issue of parking, we have to note that

there is an abject failure on the part of the government and the

authorities to provide adequate public transport to the citizens of the

country. Individual vehicles are owned by about 2% of the population.

However, this 2% of the population wants to monopolise all the

resources and infrastructure with regard to transportation. It is only

in the last two decades that cities have moved towards introducing

schemes for mass transportation but we still have a long way to go.

6. In this order we shall mainly deal with the issue of parking in

residential areas but while dealing with the issue in a holistic manner 4

we shall have to deal with the issue of parking in general. This is

necessary because if adequate parking is not provided in transport

hubs, institutional areas, commercial areas, etc., the spill­over will go

to the residential areas.

Transport Hubs

7. Wherever there are large transport hubs such as bus depots,

railway stations, metro stations, airports, etc. where a large number of

people come, there should be adequate facilities for parking. In most

of the areas people just want to be dropped off. Therefore, emphasis

should be more on “drop and go” arrangements. This aspect should be

encouraged by having a very low or no fees for drop­offs and heavy

fees for parking vehicles. Parking facilities will have to be provided at

transport hubs, especially when we talk of mass rapid transport

systems where people will come from peripheral towns to a metropolis

like Delhi. Today we have plans on the anvil to introduce Regional

Rapid Transit Systems (RRTS) connecting the metropolises in the

country with the peripheral towns. Two such RRTS are Delhi­Meerut

and Delhi­Alwar. While planning these the authorities must ensure

that adequate parking facilities are available at Alwar, Meerut and

other intervening stations. People working in Delhi coming from the

suburbs or peripheral towns would take their private transport to 5

these hubs and therefore adequate planning for the same should be

made.

Institutional Areas

8. Institutional areas can be universities, hospitals, government

buildings, courts, etc. When such buildings are planned very little

attention is paid to the parking problem. Even when someone

addresses these parking issues, normally only the needs of the

officials and the employees are addressed. To give an example there

are very few courts which have adequate facilities for parking of

vehicles by litigants. Similarly, in hospitals almost no space is

available for parking of vehicles of the patients or their attendants and

the entire parking space is used by doctors, nurses and other hospital

staff.

Commercial Areas

9. Commercial areas such as commercial malls, cinema halls,

market places, corporate offices, vegetable markets, grain markets,

etc. have different requirements. In markets where bulk items have to

be transported like subji mandis, fruit mandis, etc. there has to be

adequate provision for parking of transport vehicles like trucks,

tempos, etc. In fact, it is not only parking but other facilities, such as 6

CNG stations, petrol stations, electric charging points, etc. which

should be made available within these areas.

10. Whether it be a transport hub, an institution or commercial area,

each will have its own specific requirements and these have to be

addressed by the planners and architects to ensure that adequate

arrangement is made for parking of vehicles and the persons visiting

these transport hubs, institutions, commercial areas are not forced to

park on the roads or in spaces which are not meant for parking.

11. There should be in our view a statutory regime wherein before

any person/authority is given permission to build and operate such

transport systems, institutions and commercial areas assessment with

regard to the needs of parking for the next 25 years at least should be

made and parking space should be developed accordingly.

12. Having said that we are not oblivious to the hard reality that in

certain colonies and areas parking of some vehicles will have to be

permitted on the roads because the number of vehicles is much more

than those which can be parked inside the houses. In fact in some

colonies, especially in colonies where people belonging to middle class

and lower middle class reside there is virtually no space within the

plots to park vehicles.

13. It is not as if the municipal authorities and other authorities are 7

not alive to the problem of parking. However, the pace at which they

are moving is extremely slow. There is also total lack of innovation in

finding solutions. Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control)

Authority (EPCA) in consultation with the South Delhi Municipal

Corporation (SDMC) has earmarked the area of Lajpat Nagar to run a

pilot project to ease the problem of parking. Two other colonies,

Kamla Nagar in North Delhi and Krishna Nagar in East Delhi have

also been identified by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC)

and the East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC) respectively for

running such similar pilot projects. These are the colonies which

probably face the highest problem of parking. If the pilot project is

successful in these colonies we see no reason why such a project

should not be followed in other areas too.

14. If we take up the case of Lajpat Nagar itself, this is a colony

which was inhabited initially by people who came as refugees from

what is now called Pakistan. They were given small tenements and

over a period of time the single storey constructions have become

double and triple storeys. The plot sizes are by and large small

though there are a few big houses. The Central Market in Lajpat

Nagar is one of Delhi’s most popular and crowded markets. It is

almost impossible to find parking space during the market hours. In 8

the last 1 or 2 years there has been some improvement after linking

Lajpat Nagar with metro rail and also by making traffic move one way.

However, the problem is so acute that a large number of visitors end

up parking their vehicles in the residential areas which causes

problems to the residents.

15. On the other hand these residential houses where the

inhabitants were supposed to have only one vehicle now have 3­4

vehicles and as per the Report No. 98 of EPCA there are approximately

3.6 floors per plot and there are at least 2 cars per floor and the

average plot area is 150 sq.metres, meaning thereby that there are

about 7­8 cars per plot. The plot sizes are so small that 8 cars cannot

be parked in a plot of that size. Resultantly, most of the cars if not all,

are parked on the road which clogs up the roads and even

ambulances, fire brigades, etc., cannot move. This situation cannot

be allowed to go on.

16. As noted by EPCA there is a huge gap between the available

space for parking and the demand. EPCA has involved the Residents

Welfare Associations (RWAs), and along with the RWAs has come up

with certain suggestions for this pilot project. One of the suggestions

is that parking permits can be issued to the residents whereby they

will be issued stickers which would identify the cars of residents as 9

the ones that can be parked in that area. EPCA has suggested that

there should be monthly charges for the same but the Government of

NCT has opposed the same and at this stage we are not passing any

orders in this regard. However, it would not be unreasonable to

expect the residents to at least share the burden of administrative

costs to pay for the stickers, and hiring of security guards etc.

17. The Transport Department of the NCT of Delhi has also notified

the draft for Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places

Rules of 2019 in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause 41 of

section 2 read with Section 117, sub­section (3) of Section 127 and

clause (e), (h) and (i) of sub­section (2) of Section 138 of the Motor

Vehicle Act, 1988 (59 of 1988). This policy envisages area parking

plans to be notified within 4 months from the coming into force of

these Rules. One heartening feature of this policy is that in its order

of priority, it gives first priority to pedestrians/cyclists, secondly to

mass public transport; thirdly to emergency vehicles, fourthly to

vehicles for differently abled persons ­ their pick up and drop; then

comes personal motor vehicle parking; short duration parking; on­

street parking; overnight parking for transport vehicles etc. Another

important aspect of this policy is that it lays down that parking

arrangements must not impinge on the free movement of traffic. It 10

has other rules relating to payment of parking fees etc.

18. Clause 11 of the Policy deals with parking in residential streets

and lanes. This reads as follows :­

“11. Parking in residential streets and lanes – (1) The Area Parking Plan made by civic agencies shall include, in their scope, parking arrangements within residential areas. The plan within such areas shall be made in consultation with the residents/Resident Welfare Associations.

(2) The civic agencies shall consider developing open areas, other than designated green areas / parks, near the colonies as parking lots on payment basis. Regular shuttle services may be prescribed as a part of parking facility, the charges for which shall be included in the parking fees.

(3) Further, the owners of vacant plots in the residential colonies and commercial areas should be authorized for use of these plots as parking places against parking fees. Upon permission to use such vacant plot also as multi­level parking under building bye laws, such plots can be used as such for that purpose. Appropriate tax measures may be adopted by civic agencies to incentivize this process.

(4) Parking on footpaths shall be strictly prohibited and civic agencies shall tow such illegally parked vehicles.

(5) On all lanes and streets, a lane must be earmarked for unhindered movement of emergency vehicles like ambulances, fire tenders, police vehicles, etc. No parking shall be allowed on this lane.”

Therefore, this Policy envisages the preparation of area parking plans,

the scope and ambit of such plans and the preparation of these plans

in consultation with the residents or the RWAs. This Policy also

encourages the use of open areas other than the designated green

areas and parks near the colonies as parking lots on payment basis.

Private parking is also encouraged where vacant land is owned by

private parties. An important aspect of this Policy is that it envisages

that the parking charges would include the cost of transporting the

person from the place where his/her vehicle is parked to the market 11

area by providing shuttle service. We direct that such facility should

be by non­polluting vehicles such as electric or battery operated

vehicles, golf­carts etc.

19. This Clause also has two other very important aspects. Parking

on footpaths is strictly prohibited. There can be no violation of this

and it cannot be permitted under any circumstances. Footpaths are

meant for pedestrians. Many houses encroach footpaths for many

reasons such as extending the garden, making security guard cabins

etc. All these are encroachments of public space. We direct that all

security guard cabins should be built within the plot area and not on

the footpaths. In any colony where the footpath is found to be

encroached upon, strict action should be taken against the owner and

the encroachment should be removed from the footpath. In case such

house owners after removal of the encroachment again encroach upon

the footpath then rules may be framed to discontinue municipal

services like water, electricity, sewage etc. to the residence of the

encroachers.

20. The policy relating to residential areas also provides that a lane

must be earmarked for unhindered movement of vehicles like

ambulances, fire tenders, police vehicles etc. This is very essential not

only to take care of medical emergencies, fire hazards etc., but also to 12

ensure that the law and order enforcement agencies can move without

any hinderance. This lane will also obviously be used by the

residents. This lane should be clearly earmarked on both sides by

yellow fluorescent paint or strips and not even an inch of space within

the two yellow lines should be permitted to be used for parking. This

will prevent perpendicular parking and encourage parallel parking.

21. EPCA has prepared a Report for pilot project for Lajpat Nagar­III

but the same Report with minor variations can be utilised for other

two colonies also. Without expressing our opinion on the report at

this stage we prima facie feel that the pilot project should continue in

Lajpat Nagar as suggested by the EPCA for at least a period of 3

months, where after this Court would be in a better position to

evaluate both the short­comings and the benefits of the project. We

are not at this stage going into the details of the pilot project because

we do not, in any way, want to influence the working of the said

project. At the same time we would like to emphasise that what we

have culled out above from the parking policy must not be

compromised and the draft parking policy must be followed in letter

and spirit.

22. The pilot project envisages a demand for parking of 3510 cars in

Lajpat Nagar­III whereas the demarcated legal parking can only 13

accommodate 1830 cars. This means there is a gap of 1680 cars.

EPCA has identified sufficient alternative space to accommodate these

cars in various parking spaces available and through shared parking

with hospitals and educational institutions. Institutions like

hospitals, schools etc. do not require parking space once the working

hours are over. Therefore, this idea of sharing the parking space is

very good and could be extended to other areas too. However, in such

event, the owners of such institutions may have to be monetarily

compensated and we leave that question open for determination at a

later stage.

23. Parking lots can be of various types and different modules of

parking will be required in different areas. Traditionally, parking

areas are open pieces of land where the parking areas are marked. A

lot of area has to be left for the movement of vehicles. This is the least

expensive but also the least efficient way of providing parking.

However, this can be a solution in residential areas where the problem

of parking is not so acute. If after identification of the requirements of

parking as done in the case of Lajpat Nagar by EPCA, sufficient open

land can be identified for accommodating all the vehicles. This

traditional method may be the solution.

24. The second type of parking is multi­level parking which includes 14

both underground and over ground parking. Underground parking

though more expensive to construct, is sometimes better in the longer

run especially when colonies are being developed because the land

above the parking area can be used as a park. Parks and parking can

be effectively combined. This is a concept used in various countries

all over the world where there are 2 to 3 or even more levels of

underground parking. As far as over­ground parking is concerned, it

is definitely cheaper than underground parking to construct but care

should be taken that the number of floors over the ground do not

violate the building norms and multilevel parking does not become an

eyesore. The problem of both multilevel and underground parking is

that, though due to increase of levels more cars can be parked in the

same area, a lot of space is wasted for providing access to the vehicles

to move in and out of the parking areas. Spiral parking is another

effective way of increasing parking space in the same area. The

structure for the parking is circular in area and parking is done in

concentric circles.

25. If automatic parking is introduced in these multilevel and spiral

parkings then the amount of usable area becomes large and the

number of vehicles which can be parked in the same area rises 15

exponentially. When automation takes place in spiral parking only the

central hub of the parking area is used for the automated lift(s) and

that will require at the best the space of two or three vehicles.

26. Open parking or multi­level parking may be useful in residential

areas but automated multi­level parking and automated spiral parking

is the need of the hour for parking in institutions like hospitals,

courts, transport hubs, etc. where the demand for parking of vehicles

is very high.

27. Another type of parking is stack parking. This requires no

permanent construction. A frame­structure is raised and depending

on the height of the structure, 2 or 3 cars are parked or ‘stacked’ one

above the other by means of automated lifts. This type of parking is

also useful in crowded areas and markets where availability of space is

less and also where the alternative multi­ level parking is being

constructed but will take a lot of time to be built.

28. Obviously these parking facilities come at a price. They are not

cheap to erect and maintain. It is for the authorities to plan out how

these parking facilities are to be financed. It is for the State to decide 16

whether it will bear the cost or it wants the users to pay for the

parking area. However, one thing is certain. It is the responsibility of

the State to ensure that the roads are free and clear, free from parking

and that there is reasonably large amount of parking space available

to citizens in residential areas, commercial areas, institutional area,

transport hubs etc.

29. Modern technology must be used to ensure that parking spaces

are utilised to the maximum and for that it is necessary to have Radio

Frequency Identification (RFID) tags for all vehicles coupled with the

parking guidance and information system in transport hubs,

institutions and commercial areas. Parking charges, if any can be

paid directly to the parking operator through the RFID tags which will

reduce human intervention and corruption. One RFID tag can be

used not only to pay parking charges but also at toll barriers etc.,

wherever vehicles have to pay charges for use of the road or parking

space. Payment through RFID tags is automatic and speedy. Since

there is no human intervention there is no dispute and the daily news

of persons being beaten up at toll plazas would hopefully go down. For

vehicles which are exempt from payment of such toll charges etc., the

RFID tags can be programmed accordingly and these vehicles on the 17

basis of RFID tag identification can go through these toll plazas

without payment of fees. This will virtually do away with the need of

having separate lanes for exempted category vehicles.

30. In any parking facility where more than 100 cars can be parked

parking guidance and information systems should be compulsorily

used. The number of vacant parking spaces should be clearly

identified and displayed prominently on signages outside the

institutional/commercial areas as well as outside the parking. The

parking guidance system should clearly indicate which entrance/route

the motor vehicle users should use to reach the nearest vacant

parking. This will help in making parking not only more efficient but

also reduce the traffic jams outside the parking area.

31. The pilot project of EPCA started in Lajpat Nagar from April,

2018 and we expect EPCA to give us a detailed report of the working of

the pilot project in Lajpat Nagar by 30.12.2019. We request EPCA to

prepare pilot project(s) for Krishna Nagar and Kamla Nagar within two

weeks, immediately whereafter such pilot projects will be started

there. With regard to the working of such pilot projects let the report

be submitted by 30.12.2019.

18

32. In view of the above discussion we issue the following directions:­

1. We direct the New Delhi Municipal Corporation, North Delhi Municipal Corporation, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, East Delhi Municipal Corporation and Delhi Cantonment Board to ensure that all the pavements, in the residential areas are cleared from all encroachments and ensure that the pavements are made usable by pedestrians. The persons who have encroached upon the pavements shall be given notice of 15 days to remove the encroachment and in case they fail to do so the encroachment shall be removed by the municipal authority/authority concerned at the cost of the encroacher which shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The authorities may also consider framing rules to discontinue municipal services to repeat encroachers.

2. We direct that the draft rules of the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules 2019 be notified at the earliest and not later than 30.09.2019. List for compliance on 04.10.2019.

3. Once the rules are notified it shall be the duty of all concerned to ensure that the said rules are enforced in letter and spirit.

4. The Govt. of NCT is directed to ensure that while granting permission to build any structures, there is proper assessment of the parking needs for the next 25 years and requisite parking facilities are available.

5. We direct EPCA and the municipal authorities to take into consideration what has been stated in the judgment while evaluating the feasibility and effectiveness of the pilot project.

6. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, the municipal authorities and 19

EPCA are directed to consider the viability and effectiveness of introducing RIFD tags, parking guidance and information systems and last mile connectivity from parking spaces to commercial areas, institutions etc. and submit a report in this behalf by 30.09.2019 and for this purpose let the matter be listed in Court 04.10.2019.

7. After the reports on the pilot project are received further directions shall be issued.

33. List this matter on 13.01.2020.

……………………………….J. (Arun Mishra)

……………………………….J. (Deepak Gupta)

New Delhi September 2, 2019 20

ITEM NO.1502 COURT NO.4 SECTION PIL-W

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 13029/1985

M.C. MEHTA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)

[PARKING POLICY]

Date : 02-09-2019 This matter (Parking Policy Issue only) was called on for Judgment today.

Counsel for the parties Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Snidha Mehra, Adv. Mr. S. S. Rebello, Adv. Mr. B. V. Balram Das, Adv.

Mr. R. s. Gerwal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Ms. Meenu Sethi, Adv. Mr. R. K. Singh, Adv.

Ms. Priya Puri, Adv. Mr. Yati Sharma, Adv. Ms. Srishti Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ranjay Dubey, Adv.

Mr. Anil Grover, Adv. Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.

Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Adv. Mr. Shakti Singh, Adv.

Applicant-in-person, AOR Petitioner-in-person

Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Mr. Rajesh Kumar Chaurasia, AOR Mr. Annam D. N. Rao, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Pramod Dayal, AOR Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR 21

Mr. R. P. Gupta, AOR Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kumar-i, AOR M/S. Parekh & Co., AOR Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, AOR Mr. Satya Mitra, AOR Ms. Nandini Gidwaney, AOR Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, AOR Mr. Pavan Kumar, AOR Mr. Ravindra Kumar, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR Mr. V. K. Verma, AOR Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR Mr. Ejaz Maqbool, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, AOR M/S. S. Narain & Co., AOR Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, AOR Mr. Vijay Panjwani, AOR M/S. M. V. Kini & Associates, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mrs. Rani Chhabra, AOR Mr. Abhishek, AOR Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Sudhir Mendiratta, AOR Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR M/S. Saharya & Co., AOR Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR Mr. Shri Narain, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR Mr. Sandeep Narain, AOR Mr. Tara Chandra Sharma, AOR Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Ajit Pudussery, AOR Mrs. K. Sarada Devi, AOR Mr. Pradeep Kumar Bakshi, AOR Mr. G. Prakash, AOR Ms. Manjula Gupta, AOR Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, AOR Mr. T. V. Ratnam, AOR Mrs. Bina Gupta, AOR Mr. Umesh Kumar Khaitan, AOR M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR Mr. S. S. Shroff, AOR Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, AOR Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR Mr. Ravindra Bana, AOR 22

Mr. Bimal Roy Jad, AOR Mr. Surya Kant, AOR Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. S. K. Bhattacharya, AOR Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR Ms. Shalini Kaul, AOR Mr. Abhijat P. Medh, AOR Mr. Munawwar Naseem, AOR Ms. Pritha Srikumar, AOR Mr. Senthil Jagadeesan, AOR Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, AOR Mr. M. P. Devanath, AOR Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, AOR Ms. Surabhi Sanchita, AOR Ms. Divya Roy, AOR Mr. Vivek Gupta, AOR Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR Ms. Surbhi Mehta, AOR Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Ms. Garima Prashad, AOR M/S. Karanjawala & Co., AOR Mr. Rajiv Yadav, AOR Mr. Gaurav, AOR

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta pronounced the reportable

order of the Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and

His Lordship.

The operative portion of the order is reproduced hereunder :-

“32. In view of the above discussion we issue the following directions:-

1. We direct the New Delhi Municipal Corporation, North Delhi Municipal Corporation, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, East Delhi Municipal Corporation and Delhi Cantonment Board to ensure that all the pavements, in the residential areas are cleared from all encroachments and ensure that the pavements are made usable by pedestrians. The persons who have encroached upon the pavements shall be 23

given notice of 15 days to remove the encroachment and in case they fail to do so the encroachment shall be removed by the municipal authority/authority concerned at the cost of the encroacher which shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The authorities may also consider framing rules to discontinue municipal services to repeat encroachers.

2. We direct that the draft rules of the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules 2019 be notified at the earliest and not later than 30.09.2019. List for compliance on 04.10.2019.

3. Once the rules are notified it shall be the duty of all concerned to ensure that the said rules are enforced in letter and spirit.

4. The Govt. of NCT is directed to ensure that while granting permission to build any structures, there is proper assessment of the parking needs for the next 25 years and requisite parking facilities are available.

5. We direct EPCA and the municipal authorities to take into consideration what has been stated in the judgment while evaluating the feasibility and effectiveness of the pilot project.

6. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, the municipal authorities and EPCA are directed to consider the viability and effectiveness of introducing RIFD tags, parking guidance and information systems and last mile connectivity from parking spaces to commercial areas, institutions etc. and submit a report in this behalf by 30.09.2019 and for this purpose let the matter be listed in Court 04.10.2019.

24 7. After the reports on the pilot project are received further directions shall be issued.

33. List this matter on 13.01.2020.”

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (JAGDISH CHANDER) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER 25

REVISED ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.4 SECTION PIL-W

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 13029/1985

M.C. MEHTA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)

(IN RE: PET COKE(1) IA NOS. 100194, 102169 AND 108253/2018 (APPLNS.

FOR INTERVENTION, PERMISSION/DIRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATION OF ORDER DT. 26.7.2018 ON BEHALF OF INDIAN STEEL ASSOCIATION)(2) IA NOS. 77903, 77914, 115646, AND 131529/2019 (APPLNS. FOR IMPLEADMENT, DIRECTIONS, PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD ADDL. DOCUMENTS AND APPLN. FOR PERMISSION TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO EPCA REPORT NO. 101 ON B/O RAIN CII CARBON (VIZAG) LTD.(3) IA NOS. 127076 AND 127082/2019 (APPLNS. FOR IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTIONS ON B/O GOA CARBON LTD.)(4) IA NOS. 127086 AND 127089/2019 (APPLNS. FOR IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTIONS ON B/O PETRO CARBON AND CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.)5) IA NOS. 113743 AND 113750/2019 (APPLNS. FOR IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTIONS ON B/O M/S BHARAT ALUMINIUM COMPANY LTD.)(6) IA NOS. 104645 AND 104653/2019 (APPLNS. FOR IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTIONS)

Date : 02-09-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

Counsel for the parties MR. HARISH N. SALVE, SR. ADVOCATE (A.C.) [NOT PRESENT]

MS. APARAJITA SINGH, SR. ADVOCATE (A.C.)

MR. A.D.N. RAO, ADVOCATE (A.C.)

MR. SIDDHARTHA CHOWDHURY, ADVOCATE (A.C.)

Mr. C. A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv.

Mr. SYED JAFAR ALAM, ADVOCATE Mr. Pranav Jain, Adv.

Ms. Shivani Khandekar, Adv.

26

Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv.

Mr. Sayan Ray, Adv.

Mr. Soumo Palit, Adv.

Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Sr. Adv.

Mrs. Snidha Mehra, Adv.

Mr. S. S. Rebello, Adv.

Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv.

Mr. Chandra Pratap Singh, Adv.

Mr. Karmendra Pratap Singh, Adv.

Mr. Rahul Tomar, Adv.

Mr. B. V. Balram Das, Adv.

Mr. D. L. Chidananda, Adv.

Mr. Rajesh K. Singh, Adv.

Mr. S. S. Rebello, Adv.

Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Adv.

Ms. Suhasini Sen, Adv.

Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv.

Mr. G. S. Makker, Adv.

Ms. Snidha Mehra, Adv.

Mr. S. S. Rebello, Adv.

Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.

MR. B.V. BALRAMDAS, ADVOCATE

PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

MR. B.K. PRASAD, ADVOCATE

MR. SANJAY KR. VISEN, ADVOCATE

MR. ABHISHEK, ADVOCATE

MS. RUCHI KOHLI, ADVOCATE

MR. CHIRAG M. SHROFF, ADVOCATE Ms. Mahima C. Shroff, Adv.

Ms. Yashika Verma, Adv.

MS. ANIL KATIYAR, ADVOCATE

Mr. Nawneet Vibhaw, Adv.

Mr. Nihal Rao, Adv.

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.

Ms. Ekta Kapil, Adv.

For M/S KHAITAN AND CO.

27

Mr. Arnav Dash, Adv.

MR. DHANANJAY MISHRA, ADVOCATE

Ms. Ranjana Roy Gawai, Adv.

Ms. Prachi Golechha, Adv.

MS. DIVYA ROY, ADVOCATE

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

(1)

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 100194, 102169 AND 108253/2018 (Applns. For Intervention, Permission/Directions And Clarification Of Order Dt. 26.7.2018 On Behalf Of Indian Steel Association)

(2)

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 77903, 77914, 115646, AND 131529/2019 (APPLNS. For Impleadment, Directions, Permission To Place On Record Addl. Documents And Appln. For Permission To File Objections To Epca Report No. 101 On B/O Rain Cii Carbon (VIZAG) Ltd.

(3) IA NOS. 127076 AND 127082/2019 (APPLNS. FOR IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTIONS ON B/O GOA CARBON LTD.)

(4)

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 127086 AND 127089/2019 (Applns. For Impleadment And Directions On B/O Petro Carbon And Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.)

(5)

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 113743 AND 113750/2019 (Applns. For Impleadment And Directions On B/O M/S Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd.)

(6) 28

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 104645 AND 104653/2019 (Applns. For Impleadment And Directions on behalf of M/s Vedanta Ltd. And Anr.)

List all the above interlocutory applications/issues on

13.09.2019.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (JAGDISH CHANDER) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER