IMPORTANT POINT
Classification made by notification dated 20th October, 2004 is valid and justified and notification dated 20. 1. 2009 is clarificatorty.

Headnote:Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 – Rule 115(14) and 90(7) – Notification No. GSR 686 (E) dated 20th October, 2004 and GSR 37 (E) dated 20. 1. 2009 – Classification of vehicles in two categories: Manufactured after 1. 4. 2005 and prior to 1. 4. 2005 – While first category required to conform to BS III, second category permitted to ply with BS I or BS II – However second category vehicles prohibited from picking up or setting down goods between two points situated in the National Capital Region unless they conform to BS III – Classification justified having nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the legislation – Amendment by Notification of 2009 clarificatory. (Para 25, 26)
       (1998) 6 SCC 63; (1969) 2 SCC 166 – Relied upon
       Facts of the case:
       The notification no. GSR 686 (E) dated 20th october, 2004 is in issue by which sub-rule (14) was inserted in Rule 115 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. This sub-rule prescribed the mass emission standards (Bharat Stage-III which is popularly called euro-III)) for four wheeled vehicles.
       The clear interpretation of the notification dated 20. 10. 2004 was that the vehicles manufactured after 1. 4. 2005 and complying with BS-III norms and the vehicles manufactured prior to 1. 4. 2005 complying with BS-I and BS-II norms but not more than 15 years old could ply within the National Capital Region. In the said notification, an exception has been provide in respect of four wheeled transport vehicles holding Inter-State permits or National Permits or All India Tourist Permits but not complying with BS-III norms even though manufactured on or after 1. 4. 2005, which exception would apply only if such vehicles were plying on the inter-State Routes beyond the National Capital Region. In other words, such vehicles could not ply within the national Capital Region and other cities mentioned in the notification.
       THE appellant Bharat Petroleum Corporation limited, in view of the legal position, on 30. 3. 2007, issued notice inviting tenders for transportation of liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) Cylinders within the national Capital Region from its bottling plant at Piyala in Bahadurgarh to its Badarpur Depot and therefrom to the godowns of its LPG distributors within Delhi. Clauses 9. 3 (a) and 9. 3 (b) of the special terms of contract of the Notice inviting tenders prescribed that the trucks offered for Delhi should comply with BS-III emission norms if manufactured on or after 1. 4. 2005 and the age of the truck should not be more than 12 years from the month of floating of the Notice inviting tenders as would appear from the "registration Certificate Book" of the truck.
       Respondent no. 1 filed a writ petition No. 2882 of 2007 in the High Court of Delhi challenging the eligibility criteria of the trucks to be offered by the bidders which was dismissed.
       The High Court by its impugned judgment dated 29. 10. 2007 has held that respondent no. 1 herein is entitled to participate in the tender process initiated by the appellant. herein, offering four wheeled vehicles manufactured on or after 1. 4. 2005 which are Euro-II/ bharat Stage-II compliant and having national permits/ inter-state permits.
       Finding of the Court:
       High Court misinterpreted the notification.
       Result:
       Appeal allowed.

DALVEER BHANDARI, J.

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) THE appellant Bharat Petroleum Corporation limited has filed this appeal against the judgment of the high Court of Delhi passed in writ petition No. 5532 of 2007 dated 29th October, 2007.

( 3 ) IT is imperative to evaluate the historical perspective in order to properly appreciate main issue involved in this case. The notification no. GSR 686 (E) dated 20th october, 2004 is in issue by which sub-rule (14) was inserted in Rule 115 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. This sub-rule prescribed the mass emission standards (Bharat Stage-III which is popularly called euro-III)) for four wheeled vehicles. This notification was based on the judgment of this court in M. C. Mehta v. Union of India and Others (1998) 6 SCC 63. The relevant portion of the notification dated 20th October, 2004 reads as under:-

" (1) These rules may be called the Central motor Vehicles (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2004. (2) They shall come into force- (a) in the National Capital Region and the cities of Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, bangalore, Hyderabad including secunderabad, Ahmedabad, Pune, Surat, kanpur and Agra in respect of four wheeled vehicles manufactured on and from 1st April, 2005 except in respect of four wheeled transport vehicles plying on inter-State Permits or National Permits or all India Tourist Permits within the jurisdiction of these cities; and (b) In other areas of the country, from such date as may be notified by the Central government. Explanation.- In this sub-rule "national capital Region" shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (f) of section 2 of the national Capital Region Planning Board Act, 1985 (2 of 1985 ). "

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the appellant, the notification dated 20. 10. 2004 makes it abundantly clear that the four-wheeled transport vehicles manufactured on and from 1. 4. 2005, except in respect of four wheeled vehicles plying on Inter-State Permits or on the National Permits or All India Tourist Permits within the jurisdiction of the national Capital Region and certain other selected cities, would be permitted to ply only if they have Bharat Stage-III certificate. In other words, it became mandatory for all the vehicles manufactured after 31. 3. 2005 to obtain bharat Stage-III certificate.

( 5 ) IN M. C. Mehta (supra), this court realizing the urgency and importance of protection and improvement of the environment directed the authorities to take urgent steps to tackle the acute problem of vehicular pollution in delhi. The court was distressed at the apathy of the state Administration when according to the white Paper published by the Government of India, the vehicular pollution contributed 70% of the air pollution as compared to 20% in 1970. In the said white paper, a deadline of 1. 4. 1998 had been proposed for implementation of major actions. No concrete steps were taken. It may be pertinent to mention that the authority headed by Shri Bhure Lal proposed certain measures for immediate improvement of air quality and had given a time-frame but those important recommendations of the committee were not implemented. The Bhure Lal committee also proposed the following measures within the time-frame in its action-take report filed in this court:

Time Frame

Augmentation of public transport (stage carriage) to 10,000 buses.

01-04-2001

Elimination of leaded petrol from the NCT Delhi as proposed by the Authority and agreed to by the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas.

01-09-1998

Supply of only premix petrol in all petrol-filling stations to two-stroke engine vehicles.

31-12-1998

Replacement of all pre-1990 autos and taxis with new vehicles on clean fuels.

31-03-2000

Financial incentives for replacement of all post- 1990 autos and taxis with new vehicles on clean fuels.

31-03-2001

No 8-year-old buses to ply except on CNG or other clean fuels.

01-04-2000

Entire city bus fleet (DTC & private) to be steadily converted to single-fuel mode on CNG.

31-03-2001

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

2009 Supreme(SC) 1609

Supreme Court Of IndiaDalveer Bhandari and Dr.Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTDVersusSUNIL BANSALArising out of SLP (C) No. 6133 of 2008Decided On : September 18, 2009

IMPORTANT POINTClassification made by notification dated 20th October, 2004 is valid and justified and notification dated 20. 1. 2009 is clarificatorty.

Cases Referred (2)

Judicial Analysis

Supreme Court Of India
Dalveer Bhandari and Dr.Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD
Versus
SUNIL BANSAL
Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6133 of 2008
Decided On : September 18, 2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Classification made by notification dated 20th October, 2004 is valid and justified and notification dated 20. 1. 2009 is clarificatorty.