JUDGMENT A. B. CHAUDHARI, J. :- In the present petition there is a challenge to notification dated 25.02.20 II issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati City, Amravati in the matter of regulation of traffic in Amravati City in view of the congestion in the traffic. 2. We have perused the writ petition so also the affidavits in reply filed by the respondent. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents. 3. There is no dispute about the power of Deputy Commissioner to issue notification like the one in question. The only challenge in the petition is about violation of the fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The respondents have heard the objection and suggestions which were invited from public at large as also from the aggrieved party viz. Amravati Mal Dhakka Vahatuk Truck Association, Amravati and thereafter had taken a decision. Finding no substance in the objections, the same were not accepted by the authority. It is further seen that the authority as a fact found that smooth traffic in the heart of Amravati city was paramount consideration to avoid inconvenience to the public at large. Thus, the authority kept public interest in mind and imposed certain restrictions by regulating traffic by issuing notification. As stated earlier, after hearing the objections and suggestions, which were received and even the objections raised by Amravati Mal Dhakka Vahatuk Truck Association, Amravati notification was issued. We quote relevant portion from paragraph Nos. 9, 15 and 17 from the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondents No.2 and 3 : "9) ....It is submitted that objections and suggestions from the public at large had been received by the answering respondent before issuing notification dated 25th February, 2011. It is further submitted that the Mal Dhakka Vahatuk Association Amravati, had also submitted their written representation to the answering respondent. That after going through the traffic problem, increasing large number of vehicles, increasing of accident cases in Amravati City and traffic congestion respondent No.3 has in the interest and safety of peoples of Amravati City the issued the notification dated 25th February, 2011. 15) .... It is submitted that for the entering in Amravati city from Badnera everybody has to go with Navathe Plot, Rajapeth, Rajkamal Chouk, Jaistambh Chouk, Irvin Chouk, Panchavati and Old Cotton Market. 15) .... It is submitted that for the entering in Amravati city from Badnera everybody has to go with Navathe Plot, Rajapeth, Rajkamal Chouk, Jaistambh Chouk, Irvin Chouk, Panchavati and Old Cotton Market. These roads are heavily congested due to the market area, moll, and fly over, school and colleges. That, since morning to late night there were heavy rush of the people on road. There is another road for coming to Amravati City i.e. Amravati-Badnera Old bypass road. This Old bypass road is far away from the market, schools and colleges area. Therefore, by the notification dated 25th February, 2011, movements of trucks owned by petitioner have been regulated from Amravati-Bandera Old bypass road. That, before issuing the notification all the heavy motor vehicles were coming in Amravati city by crossing the heart of Amravati City, which cause heavy rush and traffic problem on this road there is always possibility of accident, danger, obstructions and inconvenience. Therefore, protecting the peoples from accidents, dangers and inconvenience the way has been changed for coming into Amravati City by the said notification. There is no harm to the petitioner; on the contrary, by this notification peoples of the Amravati city are feeling convenience in Amravati city. 17). It is submitted that number of vehicles and population of Amravati City is rapidly increasing. No doubt, in the year 2011, population and number of vehicles are very in large number as compare to the year 2002, therefore, looking to the number of vehicles, population of city and traffic problem in city the said notification dated 25th February, 2011 is issued by the respondent No.3 Deputy Commissioner of Police in the interest of general public at large. It is submitted that per day about 300 to 350 trucks of the petitioner used to ply on the road through the heart of Amravati City. That the aforesaid trucks used to unload the goods at godown situated at cotton market and for that they used to park their vehicles on the road itself. That, because of the said parking trucks the traffic following therein becomes congested and there is always possibility of accidents at the site." 4. We are satisfied that the restriction or the regulation imposed by the respondent authority is reasonable and does not tend to violate any rights, much less fundamental rights, as averred in the petition. That, because of the said parking trucks the traffic following therein becomes congested and there is always possibility of accidents at the site." 4. We are satisfied that the restriction or the regulation imposed by the respondent authority is reasonable and does not tend to violate any rights, much less fundamental rights, as averred in the petition. The authority was right in protecting the public interest in order to achieve the smooth flow of traffic and avoidance of accidents. The authority was certainly entitled to put reasonable restrictions and its action is thus, in our opinion, fully justified. We do not find any element of unreasonableness in the regulation of the traffic which is, in fact, a job of Deputy Commissioner of Police, Amravati. To the result, we find no merit in the writ petition. Hence, following order. ORDER The Criminal Writ Petition 568 of 2011 is dismissed. Rule stands discharged. No order as to costs. Petition dismissed.