The publication of prohibitory orders under Section 115 of the Motor Vehicles Act in the Official Gazette is mandatory if the order is in force for more than thirty days, and non-compliance renders the order invalid.

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Mohan Goel, J.

By way of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 10.01.2023 (Annexure P-1), issued by the District Magistrate, Kangra, at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. under Section 115 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, in terms whereof, said authority has prohibited the movement of Auto Rickshaws and commercial vehicles on the Temple Road Jawalamukhi beyond Peeple Tree, on the ground that despite the fact that the order has been in force for more than thirty days, it has not been till date published in the Official Gazette which is mandatory in terms of the proviso to Section 115 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT .

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the scheme of the act is that under Section 115 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , if the State Government or any authority authorized by the State Government in this behalf is satisfied that it is necessary in the interest of public safety or convenience etc., then it may by Notification in Official Gazette, prohibit or restrict, subject to such exceptions and conditions as may be specified in the Notification, the driving of motor vehicle or of any specified class or description of motor vehicles etc. either generally in a specified route or on a specified route. Further, in terms of the proviso, the publication of the Notification is not mandatory in the Official Gazette if the restriction is to remain enforce for not more than thirty days. However, in the present case the restriction is in force for more than thirty days and this mandatorily required publication in the Official Gazette and in the absence of publication thereof in the Official Gazette, the Order has now lost its efficacy and enforcement thereof by the respondents violates the mandate of Section 115 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Accordingly, he has prayed that the present petition be allowed and the impugned Notification be quashed and set aside.

3. In fact, when this case was heard on 31.10.2023, this Court passed the following order:-

“Learned counsel for the petitioner while drawing the attention of the Court to the provisions of Section 115 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has submitted that Annexure P-1 not having been published in the Official Gazette in terms of the said Section, more so in view of the fact that the same is in force for more than thirty days, is bad in law as the same contravenes the statutory provisions of Section 115 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Learned Additional Advocate General submits that he may be granted two days’ time to have instructions in this regard. As prayed for, list on 02.11.2023.”

4. Today, learned Law Officer has handed over to the Court a copy of instructions imparted to him by Deputy Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala, dated 1. 11.2023, relevant portion thereof stands produced hereinunder:-

“In this regard, it is submitted that order dated 10.01.2023 was issued in welfare of the general public and pilgrims. But inadvertently the same was not published in the official gazette as per the mandate of section 115 M.V Act. Now the matter will be forwarded to State Government under Section 115 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for notification in the official Gazette.”

5. Thus, a perusal of the instructions imparted to learned Law Officer makes it amply clear that there is an admission on the part of the authority itself that though inadvertently, but till date the order in issue has not been published in the Official Gazette.

6. Section 115 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT provides as under:-

“115. Power to restrict the use of vehicles.—The State Government or any authority authorised in this behalf by