The court upheld the notification restricting heavy vehicle operation on narrow roads, affirming its legality under the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

“(I). Issue a writ of Certiorari and quash Exhibits P-4 and P-5 and its all further proceedings.

(II). Issue a Writ of mandamus directing respondents to permit petitioner to ply his vehicles to transport the ‘granite aggregates’ and other permitted goods on the Menonpara- Ozhilapathy road, having loading capacity of more than 10 tons without any kind of obstruction from anybody.

(III). Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 5 to remove Exhibit P-6 public notice board erected by the side of Menonpara-Ozhalappathy Road forthwith.

(IV) To dispense with the filing of translation of vernacular documents AND (V). Issue such other relief this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Through Ext.P4 notification dated 29.09.2015, the Government of Kerala, through its Transport Department, passed the following:-

“NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of powers conferred by section 115 of The Motor Vehicles Act , 1988, (Central Act 59 of 1988), the Government of Kerala hereby prohibit the operation of goods vehicles having loading capacity of more than 10 tonnes from roads having width less than 6 metres and direct that appropriate traffic signs shall be erected under section 116 of the said Act, at all suitable places all over Kerala to bring the above prohibition to public notice.”

3. This notification was challenged in W.P.(C) No.10034 of

2016, and through Annexure R3(a) judgment, it was upheld, holding that the notification is well within the powers granted under Section 115 of the Motor Vehicles Act .

4. This Court passed an interim order on 15.10.2025, directing respondents 3 to 5 to file a statement showing the width of the road mentioned in Ext.P5. Accordingly, a statement is filed which reads as follows:-

“3. It is submitted that the Menonpara-Ozhalapathy Road (MDR) has a total length of 9.410 km and it has an average carriage way width of 7.5 m for the 1^st 1.5km (that is from km 0.000-1/500) and the remaining petition of the road has an average width of 5.5m. The carriage way is finished with BM & BC from km 0/000 to 1/500 and with chipping carpet from km 1/500 to 9/410. In this connection, the following facts are submitted.”

5. In view of the above, the petitioner used the vehicles only up to a distance of 1.5 km (from km 0.000-1/500), which has an average width of 7.5 meters. However, in view of Ext.P4, the petitioner can not use the vehicle with a capacity of more than 10 tonnes beyond the 1.5 k.m road stated by the Government and extracted above. It will be open to the State to place a signboard to demarcate the portion where the average carriage width is more than 6 m. It is clarified that the petitioner cannot use the vehicle of the specification mentioned above on the remaining portion of the road, which has an average width of only 5.5 m. The relief sought for quashing Exts.P4 and P5 cannot be accepted for the reasons stated above.

6. Needless to say, this direction will remain in force as long as Annexure R3(a) judgment is in force.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.