Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 127 (BOM)

Charles de Souza v. State of Goa

2013-01-16

U.V.BAKRE, V.M.KANADE

body2013
JUDGMENT V.M. Kanade, J. - By this Public Interest Litigation Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs : "(a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the State of Goa to comply with the provision of Rule 118 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules expeditiously. (b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ. order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to direct the respondent State to implement installation of electronic speed limiters in all commercial vehicles within a period of 6 months and to appoint a committee to supervise and monitor the same. which will submit regular implementation reports to this Court; and (c) This Court may be pleased to issue any other and further order as it may deem, fit and proper in the interest of justice." 2. The petitioners are students of Law. It is submitted that Rule 118 of the Motor Vehicle Rules. 1989 empowers the officers of the Motor Vehicle Department to issue directions regarding transport vehicles that they should be fitted with speed governors (speed controlling devices). It is, therefore, contended that a writ of Mandamus may be issued directing the State Government to comply with the provisions of Rule 118. 3. Mr. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General has submitted that the transport department has already issued a notification No. 5/1/2008/TPT and by virtue of exercise of powers conferred under sub-rule (1) of Rule 118, the Government of Goa has notified that various categories of transport vehicles referred to in the said notification would be fitted with speed governors. It is, therefore, submitted that the Government had applied its mind and accordingly has taken decision by exercising powers vested in it under the provisions of the said Rules. 4. The contention of the petitioners is that the. State Government should be directed to ensure that all the commercial vehicles are installed with speed governors. 5. We have gone through the averments made by the petitioners in the petition. In our view, such a general direction cannot be issued by this Court by issuing writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ particularly while exercising our writ jurisdiction under public interest litigation jurisdiction of this Court. 5. We have gone through the averments made by the petitioners in the petition. In our view, such a general direction cannot be issued by this Court by issuing writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ particularly while exercising our writ jurisdiction under public interest litigation jurisdiction of this Court. However, we deem it fit and proper to direct the State Government to appoint a committee which shall consider all the suggestions, which are made by the petitioners in this petition and take decision in accordance with law and if possible, within twelve weeks. 6. With this direction, the petition is disposed of. Petition disposed of.