Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 491 (UTT)

Shashank Upadhyaya v. State of Uttarakhand

2017-09-08

ALOK SINGH, K.M.JOSEPH

body2017
JUDGMENT : K.M. JOSEPH, J. 1. This Public Interest Litigation has been launched by an Advocate practising in this Court. By means of this petition, petitioner seeks to bring into focus the problems created by uncontrolled use of dazzling lights in all kinds of motor vehicles. It is the case of the petitioner, inter alia, that the use of dazzling lights needs to be stopped. According to the petitioner Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, who is appearing in person, this phenomenon is the cause of many avoidable accidents. It is pointed out that Uttarakhand being a religious and tourist destination, millions of outside vehicles reach everyday from different parts of India and, after sunset, it is most dangerous to drive any vehicle because of dazzling lights being used by other four wheelers and two wheelers (see paragraph 6 of the petition). 2. Though the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition, the same was disposed of by Annexure No. 1 judgment, which reads as follows: “From the latest affidavit filed by Dr. Umakant Panwar, Secretary and Commissioner, Transport Department, Government of Uttarakhand, it appears that appropriate steps have been taken by the State for making it obligatory on the part of the owners of trolleys to have them registered. Therefore, it appears to us that whatever was required to be done by the State Government in this regard has been done. 2. We request the enforcement agencies of the State to enforce the Rules and the law made by the State Government in regard to trolleys and close the matter. This order will not prevent the writ petitioner from re-approaching the Court regarding his grievances pertaining to lights in the motor vehicles, which, according to him, are not permissible in law.” 3. It is the case of the petitioner that there is a device known as ‘high beam-low beam switch’, which is being fitted in every motor vehicle, viz. two-wheel, four-wheel, passenger vehicles and commercial vehicles, which enables the driver to bring the lights of headlamps into dazzling lights. It is stated that the fitment of such device is in contravention of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “1989 Rules”) because there is no provision mentioned in the 1989 Rules for dazzling lights. two-wheel, four-wheel, passenger vehicles and commercial vehicles, which enables the driver to bring the lights of headlamps into dazzling lights. It is stated that the fitment of such device is in contravention of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “1989 Rules”) because there is no provision mentioned in the 1989 Rules for dazzling lights. In paragraph 14 of the writ petition, it is stated that few motor vehicle manufacturers are providing very high power halogen lights or LED lights, which virtually turns opposite drivers in total blind like situation. There is reference to Annexure No. 4, which is a supplementary affidavit filed by the Transport Commissioner-cum-Secretary of the State in the earlier writ petition, wherein he has dealt with the procedure for manufacturers before the start of manufacturing of new vehicles or its variants and the procedure on which State Transport Authorities rely to permit any new motor vehicle for registration in the State. We deem it appropriate to refer to paragraph 4 of the said affidavit, which reads as follows: “4. That it is submitted that the following procedure is actually followed by the transport department for compliance of rules, including Rule-106 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. I. Procedure followed prior to mass production of any model of vehicles: (a) It is mandatory for the manufacturer or importer of motor vehicles to obtain a certificate from a Central Govt. Agency in respect of a prototype of the vehicle to be manufactured or imported as per provision contained in Rule 126 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The certificate issued by the Central Government Agency is in respect of the compliance of provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. It is submitted that once a prototype of a vehicle to be manufactured is certified as being compliant with the provisions of the Act, the manufacturer can proceed with the production of the vehicle. It can be said that once a certificate of compliance of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules framed thereunder has been issued, it is deemed that the provisions of Rule-106 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 are also complied with. It can be said that once a certificate of compliance of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules framed thereunder has been issued, it is deemed that the provisions of Rule-106 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 are also complied with. As such at the stage of production of the vehicle the headlamps of the vehicles to be manufactured are in accordance with the specifications laid down in Rules-106 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. For ready reference a copy of one such prototype approval certificate issued by the Central testing agency is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-SCA-1 to this affidavit. (b) Rule 126-A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 provides for conducting test on vehicles drawn from production line of the manufacturer to confirm that the production of vehicles is being done in terms of the certificate issued on the prototype. The Central Govt. Agencies conduct the tests on the vehicles, which are in production line and accordingly issue conformity of production certificate once in 6 months in order to ensure that the vehicles are being produced in accordance with the prototype approved. For ready reference a sample copy of the certificate of conformity of production issued by Central testing agency is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-SCA-II to this affidavit. II. Procedure followed for approval of new models of vehicles introduced for sale and registration in the State. (a) New model is physically presented in the Transport Commissioner’s Office for inspection by designated Technical Officer (Assistant Regional Transport Officer- Technical) for ensuring compliance with various provisions and specifications (including those relating to headlamps) given under Rule-106 and other Rules of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 as per Rule 135 (2) of Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011. (b) The Inspecting Officer physically verifies that the headlamps installed on the vehicle are the same as mentioned in the certificate issued by designated Central Agency under Rule-126 & 126-A of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. (c). On the basis of the prototype approval certificate issued by testing agency and the report of the technical officer mentioned above, the Transport Commissioner approves the model to be registered in the State and communicates approval order to all the Registering Authorities in the State. (c). On the basis of the prototype approval certificate issued by testing agency and the report of the technical officer mentioned above, the Transport Commissioner approves the model to be registered in the State and communicates approval order to all the Registering Authorities in the State. A copy of one such approval letter issued by Office of the Transport Commissioner is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-SCA-III to this affidavit. III. Procedure followed for registration of vehicle at the office of Registering Authority. (a) On receipt of an application for registration, the Registering Authority (Regional Transport Officer/Assistant Regional Transport Officer), as per Section-39 and Section-44 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 requires the vehicle to be physically produced at his office for inspection by Designated Technical Officer (i.e. Regional Inspector, Technical/Assistant Regional Inspector, Technical) to ensure that the vehicle complies with the provisions relating to construction and equipment standards as prescribed by the Central Government including rule 106 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. It is ensured at this point that no variation has been made in the vehicle by dealer or owner of the vehicle. (b) Along with above the registering/inspecting authority satisfies itself that the particulars contained in the application are true and are not at variance with the particulars of the vehicle as approved by the prototype testing agency prescribed in Rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. (c) It is also verified in the office of registering authority that the application form is accompanied by the sale certificate in Form 21, Certificate of roadworthiness issued by the manufacturer in Form 22, Insurance Certificate, invoice of the vehicle and proof of address. (d) It is pertinent to mention here that the vehicle is produced before the registering authority as a built-up unit and is visually inspected as such. (e) After satisfying itself as above the Registering Authority proceeds for registration and issues certificate of registration to the vehicle owner. For ready reference a sample copy of the file of a vehicle containing the application form along with the above documents is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-SCA-IV to this affidavit.” Thereafter, it refers to the procedure to be followed after registration of the vehicle. It reads as follows: “IV. Procedure followed after registration of vehicle. For ready reference a sample copy of the file of a vehicle containing the application form along with the above documents is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-SCA-IV to this affidavit.” Thereafter, it refers to the procedure to be followed after registration of the vehicle. It reads as follows: “IV. Procedure followed after registration of vehicle. (a) In respect of Commercial Vehicles, at the time of initial registration, the certificate of fitness is issued for 2 years and thereafter every year. While issuing the certificate of fitness the compliance of Rule-106 is also ensured. (b) To check for any violations, including those pertaining to use of headlamps (high beam/dazzling lights) the transport department carries out on-road checks through its mobile enforcement squads. Whenever violation is noticed the vehicle is challaned, which is compoundable under Section 177 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In the year 2011-2012 out of a total of 49850 vehicles challaned in the State, 989 vehicles were challaned for offences relating to lights, and in the year 2012-2013 a total of 815 (out of a total of 52742) were challaned in the State for offences relating to lights.” In fact, we notice that there is reference to Rule 200 of the Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011. We may also refer to the other parts of the said affidavit as they are relevant: “V. Issue of driver’s habits and behaviour regarding use of high beam and dazzling lights. (a) It is pertinent and important to mention here that the Sub Rules-1 (b) (c) & (d) of Rule 106 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 mandate that the headlights should be capable of being dipped or extinguished by the driver to avoid dazzling to the vehicle driver coming from the opposite direction. (b) Sub Rule-(1) of Rule 200 of Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011 requires the driver of a vehicle using headlights to manipulate the light in a manner so as not to cause dazzling or inconvenience to any person. (c) It may be submitted here that the onus of using headlamps in a manner that is appropriate and conducive to road safety is on the driver. (c) It may be submitted here that the onus of using headlamps in a manner that is appropriate and conducive to road safety is on the driver. It may also be submitted that it is very difficult, for the enforcement staff of the Transport Department to detect the violation for large numbers of vehicles plying on the roads across the State and the dipping of light required from the driver is only for a few moments when the vehicle is nearing or crossing a person or another vehicle coming from the opposite direction. In the circumstances the violation made by the driver regarding the use of headlamps at times may escape unnoticed and also may not come to the notice of the enforcement authorities unless such violation are complained against. VI. Issue of extra/additional lights on the vehicle. (a) Rule 105 to 111 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 prescribe the number and type of lights permissible and necessary on different categories of vehicles. Sub Rule (3) of Rule-105 also lays down that the power of the lights should comply with specifications given in Indian Standards [IS : 8415-1977]. (b) Use of lights in addition to or in deviation from provisions mentioned in the preceding para is a violation and such vehicles are challaned by Transport Department (compoundable under Section 177 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988). VII. Directions issued by Transport Commissioner. Under Sub Rule-2 of Rule-200 of Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011, the Commissioner Transport has issued directions on 13.10.2010 and 10.04.2013 for ensuring compliance of Rule-106 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. VIII. Other measures taken by the Government to enhance road safety. (a) Transport Department Organizes Road Safety week every year in the month of January to increase awareness of road safety issues, specifically for drivers to learn safer driving habits. (b) State Govt. has set up in collaboration with Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. a Motor Driving Training and Research Institute at Dehradun to impart driving skills and create awareness about driving safety. (c) The State Govt. has made a two days refresher course mandatory for drivers of Transport Vehicles who come for renewal of driving license under Sub Rule-6 of Rule-12 of Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011.” 4. (c) The State Govt. has made a two days refresher course mandatory for drivers of Transport Vehicles who come for renewal of driving license under Sub Rule-6 of Rule-12 of Uttarakhand Motor Vehicles Rules, 2011.” 4. Thereafter, petitioner would submit that, in the 1989 Rules, there is no provision of dazzling lights in headlamps by allowing mechanical device, which enables drivers to cause dazzling lights and it is in violation of the 1989 Rules and the certificate issued by the Central Government Nodal Agencies is in absolute violation of Rules 126 and 126-A. Some approval certificates issued by respondent Nos. 4 to 7 are produced. 5. Respondent No. 4 is the Director, Vehicle Research and Development, Ahmed Nagar, Maharashtra; respondent No. 5 is the Director, Automotive Research Association of India, Pune; respondent No. 6 is the Director, Central Institute of Road Transport, Pune; and respondent No. 7 is the Director, International Centre for Automotive Technology, Gurgaon, Haryana. 6. Thereafter, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “1. Hon’ble Court is prayed to issue writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondents no. 1 & 2 to ensure that usage of dazzling light by all kind of motor vehicles is prevented. 2. Hon’ble Court is prayed to issue writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent no. 1 and 2 to launch a awareness campaign in this matter for general public through holdings, and/or through media. 3. Hon’ble Court is prayed to issue writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent no. 1 and 2 to ensure strict compliance of rule 106 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 through their enforcement agencies. 4. Hon’ble Court is prayed to issue writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent no. 1 and 2 to take appropriate steps to remove such mechanical device already installed in the all kind of motor vehicles. 5. Hon’ble Court is prayed to issue writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondents no. 3 to 7 to ensure strict compliance of rule 106 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, before issuing certificate under rule 126 & 126-A of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 and not to allow any such mechanical device (low beam-high beam device) which enable drivers to turn head lamp lights to dazzle others.” 7. 3 to 7 to ensure strict compliance of rule 106 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, before issuing certificate under rule 126 & 126-A of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 and not to allow any such mechanical device (low beam-high beam device) which enable drivers to turn head lamp lights to dazzle others.” 7. Counter affidavits have been filed, to which rejoinder affidavits have also been filed. 8. In this case, respondent No. 8 is the Secretary, Society of India Automobiles Manufacturers, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. The eighth respondent has filed a counter affidavit. It is necessary to notice the stand taken by the said respondent, which reads as follows: “5. That I say that Rule 105 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, requires that every motor vehicle being driven after sunset and at any time when there is no sufficient light, shall be fitted with lamps which shall illuminate the other objects, persons and vehicles on the road so that they can be seen at a distance of one hundred and fifty five metres (155 m.). As per Rule 105(a) all four wheeled motor vehicles ought to be fitted with two or four head lamps for the purpose. As per Rule 105(b) all three wheeler and two wheeler vehicles ought to be fitted with one or two head lamps for the purpose. I say that under Rule 105(3), it is obligatory for the manufacturer of all motor vehicles except for motorcycles to have such front head lamps to be as nearly as possible of the same power and fixed at a height as specified in Indian Standards {IS 8415-1977} (Clause 4.1). The proviso to the said Rule also provides that in case of four wheel drive cross country vehicles, the maximum height of the front head lamps should be as per the limits as specified in Indian Standards IS: 8415 (Clause 4.1.1). The proviso to the said Rule also provides that in case of four wheel drive cross country vehicles, the maximum height of the front head lamps should be as per the limits as specified in Indian Standards IS: 8415 (Clause 4.1.1). Rule 105(1)(a) and (b) and Rule 105 (3) are extracted herein for the sake of convenience: “Rule 105-Lamps.-[(1) Save as hereinafter provided, every motor vehicle, while being driven in a public place, during the period half an hour after sunset and at any time when there is no sufficient light, shall be lit with the following lamps which shall render clearly discernible persons and vehicles on the road at a distance of one hundred and fifty five metres ahead:- (a) In the case of motor vehicle other than three-wheelers, three-wheeled invalid carriages and motorcycles, two or four head lamps; (b) in the case of motor cycles, three-wheelers and three-wheeled invalid carriages one or two head lamps; XX XX XX XX (3) On and from the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1993, all the obligatory front head lamps of a motor vehicle other than motor cycles shall be as nearly as possible of the same power and fixed at a height as specified in Indian Standards [IS: 8415-1977] (clause 4.1): Provided that in the case of four-wheel drive cross country vehicles, the maximum height of the said front head lamps may be as per limits specified in Indian Standards [IS: 8415-1977] (clause 4.1.1): Provided further that on and from the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1993, all vehicles other than three-wheelers of engine capacity less than 500 cc, motor cycles and three-wheeled invalid carriages manufactured shall be fitted with two rear lamps showing red light to the rear.]” 6. That I say and submit that the fitment of front head lamps in a motor vehicle in compliance of the aforesaid Rule 105 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, as a result of which such front head lamps lights up the road to enable a driver to clearly discern and view persons, objects and other vehicles on the road at a distance of 155 meters relates to and results in what is understood in common parlance as a “high beam” from a front head lamp. 8. 8. That I further submit that Rule 106 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, as it existed till very recently i.e., till 24.04.2014, stipulates and provides for parameters for deflection of head lights to prevent dazzling any person in front of the vehicle. Rule 106(1)(a) stipulates that no head lamp shall also be fitted in a motor vehicle unless such lamp is so constructed and fitted so that the beam of light emitted there from is permanently deflected downwards to such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person whose eye position is at a distance of 8 metres from the front of the lamp or at a distance of 0.5 metres to the right side of a lamp and at a height of 1.5 metres from the supporting plane of the vehicle. 9. That I say and submit that the fitment of front head lamps in a motor vehicle in compliance of the aforesaid Rule 106(1)(a) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, as a result of which a beam of light of such front head lamps lights is required to be deflected downwards to such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person in the opposite direction, relates to and results in what is understood in common parlance as a “low beam” from a front head lamp. 10. That I submit that in the design of a low beam head lamp, it is ensured that light above a particular line, generally called as “cut off line” is reduced to a very low level to ensure that dazzling is avoided. Thus, with the illumination from a vehicle coming from the opposite direction, this low beam provides the driver enough illumination to see objects on the road. In the case of an asymmetric beam, the light on the left side of the vehicle is allowed for a longer distance to provide for more visibility on the foot path side. However, this low beam is not adequate to light up the road in front of the driver at night especially when there is no vehicle coming from the opposite side or when there are no street lights on the road. However, this low beam is not adequate to light up the road in front of the driver at night especially when there is no vehicle coming from the opposite side or when there are no street lights on the road. Thus it is not only necessary but mandatory in law to have a provision for both–a low beam and a high beam which ought to be controlled by using a device or a “switch” for switching over from one kind of beam to another. 11. That I further submit that the aforesaid objective is met with in Rules 106 (1) (b), (c) and (d). Rule 106 (1) (b) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, stipulates that the beam light from a head lamp fitted in a motor vehicle should be “capable of being deflected downwards by the driver” in such manner so as to render it incapable of dazzling any person in the aforesaid circumstances. I say and submit that this Rule therefore stipulates for the provision of a “high beam-low beam manual switch” to enable a driver of a motor vehicles to switch between a high beam as required under Rule 105 and to a low beam to avoid dazzling of a person in the opposite direction as required under Rule 106 (1) (a). 12. That I say and submit that the provisions of Rule 106 (1) (c) and (d) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, also stipulates for the provision of a “switch or a device” wherein a beam of light (being emitted from a dual headlamp i.e., one head lamp with two filaments-one for high beam and another filament for a low beam) is capable of being extinguished by the operation of a device which at the same time causes a beam of light to be emitted from a head lamp which complies with the provisions of Rule 106(1)(a). In other words, this Rule stipulates the use of a manual switch to operate a single head lamp which has dual filaments- one for high beam and another filament for a low beam and stipulates that a motor vehicle should be fitted with a switch which can enable a driver to chose between using a high beam or a low beam in a single head lamp. 14. 14. That I submit that the suggested removal of the “high beam-low beam switch” which is provided for in motor vehicles in compliance with Rule 106(1) (b), (c) and (d) would not only result in the non compliance of Rule 105(1) and the notified AIS Standards but by non use of such a switch and in the absence of a high beam, the visibility on poorly lit roads would also become so low that safe driving on such roads shall become impossible. 16. That I say and submit that Rule 106 (1) and (2) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, as they existed till the 24.04.2014 have been substituted and amended by G.S.R. 291 (E) F. No. RT-11028/06/2011-MVL issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to now read as follows: “Rule 106.- (as amended on 24.04.2014) : No head lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor vehicle including agricultural tractor and construction equipment vehicle (whether fitted with single or dual head lamp) unless such lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of light emitted there from meet the requirements of respective safety standards notified under rule 124 and 124A.” 17. That I say that by virtue of the said amendment, the Government has instead of specifying the details of fitment in the Rule itself, as was done earlier, has now stipulated that such conditions would henceforth be specified in the Notifications that may be issued under Rule 124 or Rule 124A by the Central Government. I submit that the specification for fitment of head lamps as applicable on date would be those that are specified in Serial No.1 and 20 of S.O. No.1365 (E) dated 13.12.2004 which prescribed for the same. I say that Serial No.1 (i) of the said Notification prescribes the standards for automobile lamps that are to be used as head lamps and states that they shall be of AIS- 034/2004 standard. Serial No. 20 of the said Notification prescribes the fitment requirements of such lamps to be as per AIS-008/2001. Serial No. 20 of the said notification has been substituted by S.O. 436(E) F. No. RT-11011/13/2001- MVL (Vol. III) dated 15.03.2012 and now requires such fitment requirements to be those as prescribed under AIS-008 (Rev.1), 2010 as amended from time to time. 18. Serial No. 20 of the said notification has been substituted by S.O. 436(E) F. No. RT-11011/13/2001- MVL (Vol. III) dated 15.03.2012 and now requires such fitment requirements to be those as prescribed under AIS-008 (Rev.1), 2010 as amended from time to time. 18. That I submit that even such fitment requirements as prescribed in the Automotive Industry Standards (AIS) for installation requirements of light and light signaling devices for motor vehicles as prescribed by the Automotive Industry Standard Committee constituted under the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, also stipulate for an approve of the concept of a “high beam” and a “low beam” and the use of a “switch or a device” to switch and change between a high beam and a low beam in a motor vehicle. 19. That I say and submit that in an automobile headlight, a ‘meeting’ beam or a “low beam” is provided in addition to the ‘driving’ beam or “high beam” so as to reduce the dazzle for those approaching head-on to the vehicle. The Dipping Device for a head light also known as “high beam-low beam switch” is intended to change the Headlight Circuit to either driving beam (high beam) or dip beam (low beam) given a particular set of road conditions. I therefore say that a combination of the aforesaid two functions of the headlight is statutorily required and used to illuminate the road ahead of the automobile so as to reveal objects ahead from a safe distance and at the same time to also ensure minimum discomfort and glare for drivers coming from the opposite side. This most extensively used and universally accepted anti-dazzle arrangement is met with the use of either a single bifocal or double filament bulb or by the use of two single filament bulbs. The single bifocal bulbs have two filaments in which one filament is positioned in relation to the reflector to give the main forward beam, while the other filament gives the dipped beam. The two unifocal bulbs used earlier have one filament each, one to focus as a high beam and the other bulb to focus as a low beam. In each case, the driver controls this system by a switch mounted on the steering column which is known as the high beam-low beam switch. 20. The two unifocal bulbs used earlier have one filament each, one to focus as a high beam and the other bulb to focus as a low beam. In each case, the driver controls this system by a switch mounted on the steering column which is known as the high beam-low beam switch. 20. That I say that the second averment of the petitioner against the respondent nos.4 to 8 regarding use and permitting of high powered bulbs including halogen and LED lights etc., is also misconceived for the reasons as set out hereunder. I state that the very same Automotive Industry Standards (AIS) prescribed by the Automotive Industry Standard Committee constituted under the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, also prescribe for the performance requirements of lighting devices and lamps including the photometric requirements and the light distribution pattern for high beam headlamps, asymmetric low beam headlamps etc., which use either filament bulbs, halogen bulbs, LED lights or Gas Discharge bulbs. 21. That I say that the standards prescribing the performance and photometric requirements of head lamps which are presently applicable for all two, three and four wheeler private and commercial motor vehicles are those which are prescribed under S.O. No.1365 (E) dated 13.12.2004 issued under Rule 124 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, to be AIS 010/2004 for two/three wheeler vehicles and AIS 012/2004 for four wheeler vehicles. I say that the said standards prescribe and limit the light source to be 240 lumens in order to control the glare and dazzling of such head lamps irrespective of the nature of the head lamps i.e., irrespective of the fact whether the type of such head lamps is the conventional filament bulb or the halogen bulb or even a LED light or even a gas bulb. 22. That I say that the aforesaid standards have since been revised in the year 2010 and aligned to the International ECE Regulations of the United Nations and in order to keep pace with and meet all international standards, the new standards have been permitted to be used by the manufacturers with the consent of the Ministry of Surface Transport and Highways, Government of India. The present standards being applied by the automobile manufacturers which prescribe performance requirements of lighting devices, light distribution pattern and photometric requirements of bulbs to be used in two and three wheelers are prescribed in AIS-010 Part I /2010 and AIS-010 Part II/2010 while the standards being applied for four wheelers are those prescribed in AIS- 010 Part 4/2010. The answering respondent no. 8 craves leave to refer to and rely upon such prescribed standards at the time of hearing, if required. 23. That I say and submit that all the manufacturers of two, three and four wheeler private and commercial vehicles strictly comply with the various requirements prescribed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, and the Notifications/GSR’s/S.O.’s issued by the Government from time to time in respect of quality, performance requirements, photometric requirements, fitment requirements etc., off head lamps which are used in motor vehicles manufactured by them. 24. That I further say and submit that before commencing commercial production of any vehicle, the vehicle manufacturer is required to submit a prototype of the vehicle proposed to be manufactured by it and to obtain a type approval there for from the Government approval Test Agencies like the respondent nos.4 to 7 in accordance with Rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. The procedure for type approval and certification of such prototypes for compliance of the Rules are in accordance with AIS: 017-2000 standards as amended from time to time. 26. That I further say and submit that with effect from the 1st April, 1991, every vehicle manufacturer is also required under Rule 127 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 to issue a certificate of road worthiness of each vehicle sold by it upon it being manufactured in accordance with and in compliance with all applicable Rules/laws. 29. The dazzling of lights which causes difficulty in driving by other persons and at times, is a major cause of accidents especially on the hills, is generally due to the use of fancy lights which are subsequently fitted by the vehicle owners after purchase of the vehicles by replacing and removing the original head lamps used and fitted by the vehicle manufacturers. I say that there are no Rules/Regulations to control and regulate such activities–post manufacture and sale of the vehicle and once such vehicle is taken out of the show room. I say that there are no Rules/Regulations to control and regulate such activities–post manufacture and sale of the vehicle and once such vehicle is taken out of the show room. The absence of any Rules or Regulations to check and control either the quality of such fancy equipment/headlights etc., which is available in the grey market and the absence of any Rules to control or govern the repairing or fitment standards of such equipment by road side mechanics and workshops and also the absence of any Regulations to prescribe qualifications for road side mechanics who are generally not technically qualified to fit such equipments as per the prescribed standards, also results in the dazzling of persons by use of such lights fitted subsequently by the vehicle owners. Another reason and a common cause of such dazzling as is averred by the petitioner, is caused by the improper use or by the non use of the necessary high beam-low beam switches by the drives of vehicle which switches are provided for in the motor vehicle. As a matter of act, Rule 200(1) of the Uttarakhand Motor Vehicle Rules, 2011 also requires the driver of a vehicle using headlights to manipulate the light by use of the “high beam-low beam switch” in a manner so as not to cause dazzling or inconvenience to any other person. These and other anomalies which have been appropriately highlighted by the petitioner in the first part of his writ petition can be appropriately remedied by the law and enforcement agencies by formulating appropriate Regulations and by conducting regular checks to ensure the use of only original equipment as provided and fitted by the manufacturers. The enforcement agencies ought to also educate and create awareness amongst the drivers of vehicles regarding the correct use of beams and low-high beam switches etc., so as to inculcate appropriate driving habits in them and to prevent any accidents by the dazzling of lights.” 9. Now, it is necessary to notice the stand of the second respondent. The second respondent, it may be noted, is the Director General of Police, Uttarakhand, Dehradun. The said respondent has referred to reports, which have been received from the Deputy Inspector General of the Garhwal Range and the Deputy Inspector General of the Kumaon Range on the basis of the details called for by the Additional Director General of Police vide Annexure No. CA-2. The said respondent has referred to reports, which have been received from the Deputy Inspector General of the Garhwal Range and the Deputy Inspector General of the Kumaon Range on the basis of the details called for by the Additional Director General of Police vide Annexure No. CA-2. We deem it necessary to refer to paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit, which reads as follows: “10. That it is pertinent to submit here that on the representation received from the petitioner regarding the implementation of the provisions of rule 106 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 the DIG, Law and order and IG, Police Head Quarter, Dehradun vide letter dated 16.01.2013 and 09.04.2013 respectively issued directions to the SSP’s SP’s of all the districts of the State to ensure implementation of the provisions of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. In compliance thereof 3379 vehicles have been booked for violating the provisions of rule 106 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 and under section 177 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 from 16.01.2013 till May, 2013. The copy of letter dated 16.01.2013 and 09.04.2013 are being filed as Annexure No. CA5 (colly) to this affidavit.” In paragraph 11 of the counter affidavit, it has been pointed out that, as far as the prayer relating to launching of awareness campaign is concerned, the Inspector General, Law and Order, Police Headquarter, Dehradun, has issued directions to all SSPs and SPs to conduct Road Safety Week from 11.01.2014 to 17.01.2014. Thereafter, in paragraph 13, it is stated as follows: “13. That the Police department is also conducting awareness campaign by organizing classes of drivers and distributing pomphlates to the drivers/owners of the vehicles regarding road safety including issue in question. The copy of one of the pomphlate as distributed by the Traffic Police Dehradun and the photographs organizing classes of drivers are being filed as Annexure No. 8 (Colly) to this affidavit.” 10. Petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent. Therein, it is, inter alia, stated as follows: “6. That the contents of para no. 8 of the counter affidavit under reply are denied in much as it is wrong and misleading to this Hon’ble Court. Petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent. Therein, it is, inter alia, stated as follows: “6. That the contents of para no. 8 of the counter affidavit under reply are denied in much as it is wrong and misleading to this Hon’ble Court. The figure submitted in counter affidavit is in general for all offences punishable u/s 177 of MV Act, 1988, not in particular for violation of rule 106 of MV Rules, 1989 punishable u/s 177 of MV Act, 1988. This reply itself question mark seriousness of Uttarakhand police for this important matter related to safety and life of the general public. 7. That the contents of para no. 9 is admitted as per figure for the challans made by police department within Kumaun Range. It is surprise where lakhs of vehicles pass and move daily and almost 100% of them using dazzling lights. For the period 01.01.2013 to 31.05.2014 total for 17 months, only 236 challans for violation of rule 106 of MV Rules, 1989 within entire Kumaun range put serious doubts about the intention and seriousness of Uttarakhand Police for this important matter related to safety and life of the general public.” 11. A supplementary counter affidavit is filed by the second respondent. Therein, it is stated that all the SSPs and SPs of the districts had published advertisements prohibiting the illegal use of high beam dazzling lights in the daily newspapers and submitted their reports. It is further stated that the Police Department has also conducted awareness campaign by pasting banners and flexies at important places in various cities. It is stated that pamphlets had been distributed to drivers/owners of the vehicles regarding the illegal use of high beam dazzling lights. 12. Respondent No. 4 has filed a counter affidavit. Therein, it is, inter alia, submitted that a combination switch is provided in all vehicles, which has two positions; one for dipped beam and the other for main beam. It is stated that this is in line with ECE standards, which are used in all Europe and many other countries and, if used properly by the drivers, no glare will be produced. It is further stated that all auto bulbs fitted in the vehicles shall be as per AIS-034 standard only. Thereafter, it is stated in paragraphs 19 and 24 as follows: “19. It is further stated that all auto bulbs fitted in the vehicles shall be as per AIS-034 standard only. Thereafter, it is stated in paragraphs 19 and 24 as follows: “19. That the contents of paragraph no. 16 of the writ petition (PIL) as stated are denied. In reply it is submitted that Head lamp is fitted with two filaments one is operated for dipped beam and other is operated for main beam. Dipped beam is meant for use when incoming traffic is available on road to ensure no glare is created to the incoming traffic. In addition a head lamp leveling switch with 3/4 positions is provided in all vehicles as a mandatory fitment which needs to be operated by the driver to change the inclination of the head lamp in dipped beam condition when the load changes. This will ensure to help in reduction of glare on incoming traffic if operated properly. Head lamp inclination test is also conducted as mandatory test on prototype vehicle as per AIS-008/009 for four wheeler/three wheelers. 24. That the contents of paragraph no. iv of ground of the writ petition (PIL) as stated are wrong hence denied. It is submitted that CMVR Rule No. 106 prohibits Head Lamp fitments, which will dazzle incoming traffic and all the lamps ensuring light towards front shall be strictly as per CMVR Rule No. 124 and 124A. Also CMVR Rule No. 124 and notification S.O. 1365(E) dated 13/12/2004 give list of auto bulbs which are allowed to be fitted on vehicles with reference to AIS 034 standard.” 13. The fifth respondent, namely, the Director, Automotive Research Association of India has also filed a counter affidavit. The respondent is one of the seven testing and certifying agencies authorized by the Central Government under Rule 126 of the 1989 Rules. It is stated that the vehicle/component manufacturers are required to submit their prototype for type approval to any of the agencies mentioned in Rule 126. In paragraph 20, it is stated that combination switch is provided in all vehicles, which has two positions; one for dipped beam and the other for main beam, which is in line with the ECE Regulations, which are used in all Europe and many other countries. It is stated that all auto bulbs fitted in the vehicles shall be in conformity with the provisions contained in AIS-034 standard only. It is stated that all auto bulbs fitted in the vehicles shall be in conformity with the provisions contained in AIS-034 standard only. According to the 1989 Rules, 138 wattage of halogen bulbs shall not exceed 70/75 watts for 24 volts and 60/65 for 12 volts systems. It is stated that the respondent tests and certifies vehicles and auto bulbs as per law and standards in force at the time of testing. It is stated in paragraph 23 that two types of beams are mandatory as per the 1989 Rules for headlamps, namely, main beam and dipped beam. ‘Main beam headlamp’ means the lamp used to illuminate the road over a long distance ahead of the vehicle. ‘Dipped beam headlamp’ means the lamp used to illuminate the road ahead of the vehicle without causing undue dazzle or discomfort to oncoming drivers and other road users. The driver has to operate by using the combination switch as per the road, traffic, vehicle speed, etc. conditions. It is, further, stated that, in addition to this, the headlamp leveling device is a mandatory requirement, which includes switch having 3 to 4 positions in all vehicles, which needs to be operated by the driver to change the inclination of the dipper beam as per vehicle seating/loading conditions. It is, further, stated that Rule 106 prohibits headlamps fitment, which will cause dazzling hazard to incoming traffic. Further, it is stated that it further mandates that all lamps ensuring light towards front shall be strictly as per Rules 124 and 124-A of the 1989 Rules. 14. We have heard Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, petitioner in person; Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 8; Mr. V.K. Kaparwan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3; Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State/respondent Nos. 1 & 2; and Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 4 & 5. 15. Undoubtedly, petitioner has approached this Court with bona fides, as he has only sought to project the problem of accidents, which, according to him, are caused by the phenomenon of dazzling lights. It is necessary to refer to certain rules. Rule 105 of the 1989 Rules deals with lamps. It reads as follows: “105. 4 & 5. 15. Undoubtedly, petitioner has approached this Court with bona fides, as he has only sought to project the problem of accidents, which, according to him, are caused by the phenomenon of dazzling lights. It is necessary to refer to certain rules. Rule 105 of the 1989 Rules deals with lamps. It reads as follows: “105. Lamps.—(1) Save as hereinafter provided, every motor vehicle, while being driven in a public place, during the period half an hour after sunset and at any time when there is no sufficient light, shall be lit with the following lamps which shall render clearly discernible persons and vehicles on the road at a distance of one hundred and fifty five metres ahead:— (a) in the case of motor vehicle other than three-wheelers, three-wheeled invalid carriages and motorcycles, two or four head lamps; (b) in the case of motor cycles, three-wheelers and three-wheeled invalid carriages one or two head lamps; (c) in the case of a side car attached to a motor cycle one lamp showing a white light to the front; (d) in the case of construction equipment vehicle, two or four lamps showing to the front white light visible from a distance of one hundred and fifty five metres ahead. (2) Every such motor vehicle other than a three-wheeler shall also carry— (i) two lamps (hereinafter referred to as the rear lamp) showing to the rear a red light visible in the rear from a distance of one hundred and fifty-five metres; and in the case of a motor cycle one lamp showing a red light to the rear visible from a distance of seventy-five metres; and (ii) lamp, which may be the rear lamp or some other device, illuminating with a white light the whole of the registration mark exhibited on the rear of the vehicle including construction equipment vehicle, and on the side in the case of construction equipment vehicle so as to render it legible from a distance of fifteen metres to the rear: Provided that when a motor vehicle is drawing another vehicle or vehicles and the distance between such vehicles does not exceed 1.5 metres, it shall be sufficient if the last drawn vehicle carries a rear lamp or a lamp illuminating the rear registration mark: Provided further that every construction equipment vehicle shall also carry two lamps showing to the rear red lights visible in the rear from a distance of one hundred and fifty-five metres. (3) On and from the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1993, all the obligatory front head lamps of a motor vehicle other than motor cycles shall be as nearly as possible of the same power and fixed at a height as specified in Indian Standards IS: 8415—1977 (clause 4.1): Provided that in the case of four-wheel drive cross country vehicles, the maximum height of the said front head lamps may be as per limits specified in Indian Standards IS: 8415—1977 (clause 4.1.1): Provided further that on and from the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1993, all vehicles other than three-wheelers of engine capacity less than 500 cc, motor cycles and three-wheeled invalid carriages manufactured shall be fitted with two rear lamps showing red light to the rear. (3-A) On and from the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2000, all the obligatory front head lamps of a construction equipment vehicle shall be as nearly as possible of the same power and fixed at a height so that front visibility is maintained and farthermost point of equipment/attachment is clearly seen by on-coming traffic. (3-A) On and from the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2000, all the obligatory front head lamps of a construction equipment vehicle shall be as nearly as possible of the same power and fixed at a height so that front visibility is maintained and farthermost point of equipment/attachment is clearly seen by on-coming traffic. (4) The rear lamp shall be fixed either on the centre line of the vehicle or to the right hand side, and save in the case of a transport vehicle, at a height of not exceeding one metre above the ground. (5) In the case of a transport vehicle, the rear light may be fixed at such level as may be necessary to illuminate the registration mark. (6) Every heavy goods carriage including trailers shall be fitted with a red indicator lamp of size of thirty centimetres by ten centimetres on the extreme rear most body cross beam and in the case of a vehicle not constructed with body in the rear, the indicator lamp shall be fitted near the right rear light above the rear number plate: Provided that every construction equipment vehicle of an unconventional or extraordinary type in travel mode shall be fitted or installed with a red indicator lamp of size of not less than 100 square centimetres on the extreme rearmost point of the body. (7) On and from the date of commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1999, every motor vehicle manufactured shall be fitted with at least one lamp which shall automatically be operated, throwing a white light to the rear, when the vehicle is being driven in the reverse gear. (8) In the case of vehicles, other than three-wheelers of engine capacity not exceeding 500 cc, which are attached with trailers, all the lamps required to be fitted on the rear of the vehicle shall be fitted at the rear of the trailer. (8-A) On the commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles (Sixth Amendment) Rules, 2000, every construction equipment vehicle shall be fitted with two lamps at the rear throwing light to the rear when the vehicle is being driven in the reverse gear and there shall also be an audible warning system operating when the vehicle is being driven in the reverse gear, the audible warning system and the light being automatically operated when the vehicle is in reverse gear.” 16. Rule 106, of course, is the rule, which the petitioner seeks to enforce. It reads as follows: “106. Deflection of lights.—(1) No lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor vehicle including construction equipment vehicle (whether fitted with single or dual head lamp) unless such lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of light emitted therefrom— (a) is permanently deflected downwards to such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person whose eye position is,— (A) at a distance of 8 metres from the front of lamp, (B) at a distance of 0.5 metre to the right side of the lamps, i.e., fitted at right extreme of the vehicle, from the right edge of the lamp, and (C) at a height of 1.5 metres from the supporting plane of the vehicle: (b) is capable of being deflected downwards by the driver in such manner as to render it incapable of dazzling any such person in the circumstances aforesaid; (c) is capable of being extinguished by the operation of a device which at the same time causes a beam of light to be emitted from the lamp which complies with the provision of clause (a); (d) is capable of being extinguished by the operation of a device which at the same time either deflects the beam of light from another lamp downwards or both downwards and to the left in such manner as to render it incapable of dazzling any person in the circumstances aforesaid, or brings into or leaves in operation a lamp which complies with the provisions of clause (a). (2) The provisions of sub-rule (1) shall not apply to any lamp fitted with an electric bulb, if the power of the bulb does not exceed 7 watts and the lamp is fitted with a frosted glass or other material which has the effect of diffusing the light.” 17. Rule 124 comes under the heading “safety devices for drivers, passengers and road users”. Rule 124 comes under the heading “safety devices for drivers, passengers and road users”. Rule 124 contemplates that the Central Government may, from time to time, specify, by notification in the Official Gazette, the standards or relevant standards specified by the Bureau of Indian Standards of any part, component or assembly to be used in the manufacture of a vehicle including the construction equipment vehicle and the date from which such parts, components or assemblies are to be used in the manufacture of such vehicle and on publication of such notification, every manufacturer shall use only such of these parts, components or assemblies in the manufacture of the vehicle. We are not concerned with the proviso thereunder. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 124 reads as follows: “(2) Every manufacturer shall get the prototype of the part, component or sub-assembly for which standards have been notified, approved from any agency as referred to in rule 126 or Central Institute of Road Transport, Pune, or in case of compliance with notified Indian Standards from any laboratory duly authorized by the Bureau of Indian Standards. On the basis of such approval, every manufacturer shall also certify compliance with provisions of this rule in Form 22.” 18. The procedure for type approval and establishing conformity of production for components have been listed in a table and it is to be in accordance with the AIS-037-2004 till the corresponding BIS specifications are notified under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986. It deals with lighting and light signaling devices. Rule 124A was inserted w.e.f. 10.08.2004. It deals with the bulbs to be used in agricultural tractors. 19. The complaint of the petitioner is, essentially, with the use of what he describes as dazzling lights. The matter is to be decided within the four walls of the statutory rules framed by the authorities. The provisions are, as we have noticed, contained in Rules 105, 106 and 124. No doubt, Rule 124A deals with lights to be used in agricultural tractors. The main complaint of the petitioner appears to be that there is no warrant for a switch to be inserted. The case of the petitioner is that the switch is not contemplated under the Rules. On the other hand, the case of the eighth respondent appears to be that the switch is an integral part of Rule 106. The main complaint of the petitioner appears to be that there is no warrant for a switch to be inserted. The case of the petitioner is that the switch is not contemplated under the Rules. On the other hand, the case of the eighth respondent appears to be that the switch is an integral part of Rule 106. Reading Rules 105 and 106 together, it appears to us, in short, that the rule-maker intended to provide for the high beam light and the low beam light. The high beam light is to be utilized in certain situations. The low beam light is intended, in fact, to avoid accidents. Apparently, the problem arises because the drivers of the vehicles do not make use of the device as per law. This can arise, possibly, from ignorance of the law or even not being trained to use the device. 20. We have noticed the stand of the Director General of Police that several cases have been launched for violation of Rule 106. The stand of the eighth respondent, partly, is that, as far as the manufacturers are concerned, they comply with the rules and the problems arise partly because of the lights, which are fitted afterwards. Fancy lights, which do not conform to law, are fitted by the individuals. 21. We make it crystal clear that the mandate of Rule 106 is meant to be obeyed by all. It is not only an injunction against the manufacturer or the person, who assembles the vehicles; but also for any other person liable in law. If that is so, it is the bounden duty of the enforcers of the law to strictly enforce these provisions. We notice that the authorities have laid a claim that they have Road Safety Weeks. While we do take note of the Road Safety Weeks they have organized, we direct that they will have more Road Safety Weeks on a more frequent basis. Secondly, we notice that they have purported to give publicity by publishing this matter in newspapers and handing out pamphlets. We would direct them to consider using the visual media. We, accordingly, direct respondent Nos. Secondly, we notice that they have purported to give publicity by publishing this matter in newspapers and handing out pamphlets. We would direct them to consider using the visual media. We, accordingly, direct respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to seriously consider making use of the visual media on a not infrequent basis and not infrequently for creating awareness about the purport of the statutory rules and the desirability also of strict compliance of the Rules so as to avoid tragic accidents. 22. We also would observe that it is always open to the Government to approach the State Legal Services Authority, which has a number of paralegal volunteers, so that they can be deployed for creating awareness. This is besides directing that respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and all the officers under them in the concerned department will spare no efforts in enforcing Rule 106 with full vigour and as per law. 23. We would also expect that the licensing authorities will bestow their attention on this very vital and important aspect and test the knowledge of the applicant for licence in regard to these matters in particular as they go to safety of other users of the road. 24. We also make it very clear that the authorities among the respondents, who are responsible for testing the vehicles, will pass those vehicles only which are fitted with lights, which conform to law in every respect. 25. Regarding the lights, which are fitted, as is in fact the case of the eighth respondent, after the manufacturer is done with the matter, by anybody, strict action as per law will be taken. 26. The writ petition is disposed of as above.