1984 Supreme(MP) 785
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
G. L. OZA, B. M. LAL
J.P.SANGHI - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
MISC. PETN. 2146 Of 1983
Decided On : 11/28/1984
J.P.SANGHI, S.L.SAXENA, Y.S.DHARMADHIKARI
The construction of road humps and speed breakers without legal authorization or proper road signals is not justified and endangers the safety of road users. The State Government has the power to frame rules under Section 91 of the Motor Vehicles Act to regulate the construction of road humps and speed breakers and ensure the safety of the public.
Headnote:
ROAD HUMPS AND SPEED BREAKERS - CONSTRUCTION AND REGULATION - MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1939 - SECTIONS 71, 75, 77, 78, 91 - HIGHWAYS ACT - CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INSTRUCTIONS - VALIDITY AND LEGALITY OF ROAD HUMPS AND SPEED BREAKERS - DIRECTIONS FOR ERECTION OF ROAD SIGNALS AND PREPARATION OF SCHEME FOR UNIFORM DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ROAD HUMPS AND SPEED BREAKERS.
Fact of the Case:
Petition challenging the construction of road humps and speed breakers in Jabalpur and on national highways in Madhya Pradesh, alleging lack of lawful authority, absence of proper road signals, and endangerment of vehicles and their occupants. The petition sought removal of all speed breakers and proper maintenance of roads.
Finding of the Court:
1. No provision in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the Highways Act, or the Municipal Corporation Act authorizes the construction of road humps or speed breakers. 2. Central Government instructions on speed breakers are merely executive instructions and do not provide legal justification for their construction. 3. Section 91 of the Motor Vehicles Act empowers the State Government to frame rules for carrying into effect the provisions of the Act, including the prevention of danger or injury to the public or property. 4. Road humps and speed breakers have been constructed without any specification or design, resulting in variations in their height and size. 5. Proper road signals, as required by the Motor Vehicles Act, have not been erected to warn drivers of speed limits or the presence of road humps or speed breakers.
Issues: 1. Whether the construction of road humps and speed breakers is legally authorized under any law or regulation. 2. Whether the absence of proper road signals endangers the safety of road users. 3. Whether the Court should issue directions for the removal of all road humps and speed breakers or for the framing of rules regulating their construction.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The construction of road humps and speed breakers is not authorized by any provision in the Motor Vehicles Act, the Highways Act, or the Municipal Corporation Act. 2. The Central Government instructions on speed breakers are merely executive instructions and do not provide legal justification for their construction. 3. Section 91 of the Motor Vehicles Act empowers the State Government to frame rules for carrying into effect the provisions of the Act, including the prevention of danger or injury to the public or property. 4. The absence of proper road signals endangers the safety of road users by failing to provide adequate warning of speed limits or the presence of road humps or speed breakers. 5. The Court has the authority to issue directions to ensure the safety of road users and to prevent danger or injury to the public or property.
Final Decision: 1. The Court directed the respondents to erect appropriate road signals wherever speed limits are fixed or road humps or speed breakers are constructed. 2. The Court declined to issue a direction for the removal of all road humps and speed breakers, recognizing their purpose in safeguarding life and securing safety on the roads. 3. The Court directed the respondents to examine the matter and prepare a scheme within six months for a reasonable design and construction of road humps and speed breakers, to ensure uniformity and safety.
( 1 ) THIS is a petition filed by the petitioner who is an advocate of this Court. By this petition he has challenged the speed breakers which are erected in the town of Jabalpur and also on national highways passing through the territories of Madhya Pradesh.
( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the State and the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, are enjoined with the duty of maintaining roads in the town and also to maintain the national highways and the State highways running within the territorial limits of Madhya Pradesh. It is alleged by the petitioner that the respondents have been constructing road-humps and speed breakers to check the speed of vehicles passing on these roads and it is alleged that although the road-humps and speed-breakers have been constructed but the respondents have not taken care either to put proper and adequate road signals to alert the vehicle drivers nor have they cared to construct these road humps and speed breakers under any specification of design or size. It is alleged that in the town of Jabalpur itself a number of speed breakers have been constructed and in some cases they are so high that even at very ordinary speed of the vehicle they endanger the vehicles, their silencers, petrol tank and chambers hit the humps of the roads and sometimes cause serious damage. According to the petitioner, the purpose behind the construction of these road humps and speed breakers appears to be to check speed of the vehicles in order to secure safety but in fact the manner in which these speed breakers and road humps have been constructed without any signal really endanger the security of the persons travelling in the vehicles. The petitioner has also alleged that the Central government, vide letter No. PL/50 (8)/72 dated 4th June 1976, addressed to the Secretaries of the State Public Works Departments, have given guidelines as to under what circumstances the speed breakers should be constructed and it is alleged that under these instructions it was desired that wherever speed limit is to be fixed for some specific reasons, it should be ensured through speed limit signs and their strict and rigorous enforcement. Alternatively it was recommended that rumble strips and flashing signals may be considered to alert the drivers through audible/visual stimuli. It is further alleged in the petition that in order to evade the duty of controlling the traffic and the speed limit, the respondents are penalising the road users by erecting such hindrances on the roads which result in serious hazards and accidents and the petitioner has quoted an incident and the petitioner has quoted where the petitioner himself fell a victim to an accident which was caused due to a very high speed breaker on the road going to the medical college without putting any signals and signs. At the time of hearing, it was contended on behalf of the petitioner that there is no lawful authority with the respondents to create such obstacles on the roads. The law only contemplates putting up of signals whenever speed limit is fixed and therefore such road humps and speed breakers could not be justified. The relief sought in the petition was removal of all the speed breakers from the town of Jabalpur and also on all national highways in the territory of Madhya Pradesh. It is also sought that a direction be issued so that appropriate road signals be put on the roads to caution the drivers whenever such road humps or speed breakers are erected and also for a direction that the roads be properly maintained.
( 3 ) IN the return filed by respondent No. 1 it was stated that these road humps and speed breakers have been erected to avoid road accidents in the city and to control the speed of the vehicles. It is contended that human life is more precious and in order to avoid serious road accidents at the risk of little inconvenience to the vehicle drivers these road humps have been constructed. It is alleged that these have been constructed on