BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

YEAR OF PETITION: 2022

Action Committee for unaided private schools, delhi ………………….petitioner

v.

Delhi Green Tribunal and anr. ………………………………………...respondent

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO Contents Page

no.

1. List of abbreviations 3

2. Table of authorities 4

3. Table of cases 5

4. Statement of jurisdiction 6

5. Statement of facts 7

6. issues raised 9

7. Summary of arguments 11

8. Arguments advanced

8.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Table of Authorities

Constitution of india, 1950

Motor vehicle act, 2016

Water Act, 1986

Air Act, 1981

Books

MP Jain
tatement of jurisdiction

It is most humbly submitted that the present public public interest interest litigation (PIL) is
maintainable under Art.32 of the Constitution on the grounds that the fundamental rights of freedom &
liberty, equality and livelihood have been violated. Further, it is contended that there is no need to
exhaust the alternate remedies. Such disregard to the Constitutional rights accord the petitioner locus
standi to lifeline the PIL before this Hon'ble Court.
SUMMARY OF FACTS

1. The environment problems in Delhi India are a thread to the well-being of the cities and the
areas inhabitants as well as the flora and fauna. Delhi, the 6 most populated metropolis in the
world, is one of the most heavily polluted cities in India, having for instance one of the countries
highest volumes of particulate matter pollution.
2. That in May 2014 the World health organisation announced that Delhi the national capital of
India is one of the most populated cities in the world.
3. Overpopulation and the ensuing over use of scares resources such as water have put pressure
on the environment.
4. The city suffers from air pollution caused by road dust and industry with comparatively smaller
contributions from unclean engines in transportation especially diesel powered City buses and
trucks two wheelers and 3 wheelers with two stroke engines. Besides human and environmental
damage, pollution has caused economic damage as well.
5. On 8th April 2015, picking up several points brought out in the death by death series an ongoing
investigation on the quality of air in Delhi the Delhi green tribunal issued a fresh ban on all diesel
buses and trucks more than 10 years old from plying in the national capital region.
6. Subsequently Delhi government came up with a unique order where by the vehicles with odd
and even registration numbers will be allowed on alternate days from January 01, 2016.
7. It also passed and order to the question school buses as commercial buses which would serve as
public buses after school had ended in that very order this was done in order to promote the
use of public transportation rather than sold Reliance on private vehicles.
8. The modern school of environmental studies Delhi was flying school buses running on diesel
purchased in 2010 for school purposes and coincidentally all the buses were of odd number
series. This order of Delhi government prove to be the last nail in the coffin for the petitioner.
9. Reputation was not the soul victim of the ban and that's got support of all the private schools of
Delhi. The aggrieved by the order of DGT and the Delhi government the Action Committee for
Unaided Recognised Private Schools, Delhi has filed a Writ petition in the supreme court against
DGT ban and the odd even formula order of Delhi government
ISSUES RAISED

1. Whether or not the notification released by Government of Delhi is constituitionally valid or

not?
2. Whether or not school buses should be exempted from this rule?
3. Whether or not
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. Whether or not the notification released by Government of Delhi is constituitionally valid or

not?

That, By way of instant petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India r/w Article 142 of
the Constitution of India, Petitioner is challenging validity of Odd-Even Scheme of Govt of NCT of
Delhi.
That, Such notification is arbitrary, irritational, unconstitutional, abuse of power, contrary to
statutory provision Section 115(Power to restrict the use of vehicle) Motor Vehicle Act 1988 (59
of 1988) and contrary to the fundamental rights - equality before Law and equal protection of
law (Article 14 of the Constitution of India), prohibition of discrimination (Article 15 of the
Constitution of India), all citizens shall have the right to practice any profession, or to carry on
any occupation, trade or business and to move freely throughout the territory of India (Article
19[1][g] & 19[1][d]of the Constitution of India) equal opportunity in public employment, right to
establish educational institution, right to know etc. guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21
of the Constitution of India.
That, Rule of law contemplates governance by laws and not by humour, whims or caprices of
the men to whom the governance is entrusted for the time being. It is trite that be you ever so
high, the laws are above you’. This is what men in power must remember, always. Almost a
quarter century back, Hon’ble Apex Court in S.G. Jaisinghani v. Union of India and Ors., [1967] 2
SCR 703, at p.7 18-19, indicated the test of arbitrariness and the pitfalls to be avoided in all State
actions to prevent that vice.
That, it is respectfully submitted that License Plate is only for identification for Vehicle(Like
Employee Roll Number, Examination Roll Number) , like Aadhaar Number(Can we classify 1.3
Billion Indians, on the Basis of odd and even number ending, in Aadhar Card Identification
Number) and it’s in no way a class in itself.the scheme implemented by the govt. of NCT
deprives people's right of personal liberty. It means the scheme violates Art.21 of the
Constitution. Art.21 Sates as "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
according to the procedure established by the law."
In Meneka Gandhi case the Supreme Court has widened the scope of the words 'personal liberty
considerably. Bhagwati J. observed:
"The expression 'personal liberty' in Art.21 is of widest amplitude and it covers a variety
of rights which go to constitute the personal liberty of man and some of them have
raised to the status of distinct fundamental rights and given additional protection under
Art. 19."

Thus, Art.21 aquires the following conditions to be fulfilled before a person is deprived of his her
life and personal liberty:

1. There must be a valid law.

2. The law must provide a procedure. The procedure must be just. fair and reasonable.
3. The law must satisfy the requirements of Art. 14 and 19 i.c., it must be reasonable.
 When a law made then it must pass through the test of constitution. If it is inconsistent with the
provisions of the constitution, then the Supreme court shall declare it unconstitutional.

In the present case, the scheme violated the fundamental rights of the people at large. It is at
the liberty of people which mode of transport they would use. But their liberty is taken away
here which clearly violates Art.21 of the constitution.

Now about the scheme, the scheme is totally unfair and unreasonable. It is good that Govt. of
NCT Delhi has thought about curbing the air pollution but the scheme is very inefficient. It was
very carelessly made. In NCT, there are many areas even now where proper public transport is
not available.

The scheme also violated right to equality as mentioned under Art. 14 of the constitution. The
most affected people from this scheme are middle class and lower middle class families." They
have only one car for their whole family and even having one car for the whole family they
cannot use it as per their wish. Now if there any emergency arises in their house then also their
liberty to use their own car has been limited within those prescribed days with respective of
their car's number.

In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation popularly known as the pavement dwellers case,
a five Judges Bench of the court has finally ruled that the word 'life' in Art 21 includes the right
to livelihood": "that is but one aspect of the right to life. An equally important facet of that right
is the right to livelihood because no person can live without the means of livelihood. If the right
to livelihood is not treated as a part of the constitutional right to life, the easiest ways to
depriving a person of his right to life would be to deprive him of his means of livelihood.

That, this notification has been released in accordance to s. 115 of the MVA. Section 115 of the
Motor Vehicle Act 1988 was always meant to restrict vehicle on the basic of specified class of
motor vehicle. Section 115 is stated underneath.
“115. Power to restrict the use of vehicles.—The State Government or any authority authorised
in this behalf by the State Government, if satisfied that it is necessary in the interest of
public safety or convenience, or because of the nature of any road or bridge, may by
notification in the Official Gazette, prohibit or restrict, subject to such exceptions and
conditions as may be specified in notification, the driving of motor vehicles or of any
specified class or description of motor vehicles or the use of trailers either generally in a
specified area or on a specified road and when any such prohibition or restriction is
imposed, shall cause appropriate traffic signs to be placed or erected under section 116
at suitable places: Provided that where any prohibition or restriction under this section
is to remain in force for not more than one month, notification thereof in the Official
Gazette shall not be necessary, but such local publicity as the circumstances may permit,
shall be given of such prohibition or restriction.”
It is open to the State Government to impose restrictions or prohibit plying of vehicles
only in a specified area or on a specified road, it is contended that the notification
imposing the restrictions in the area of entire National Capital Territory of Delhi is
beyond the scope of the statutory provisions. Thus, it is contended that the respondents
have no power or authority to widen the scope of Section 115 of the Act by way of mere
notification.

That, Notification of Odd Even Vehicle Scheme is arbitrary, illogical, illegal, done capriciously in an
unreasonable manner and unconstitutional that in the 12 days Odd Even period(from 4th November
2019 to 14th November 2019), it exclusively allows Odd Car to Ply on the road on 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15
that is 6 days and it exclusively allows Even Car to Ply on road on 4, 6, 8, 12, 14 that is 5 days. So only
God knows why Odd Car are given preference. Odd Cars 6 days Vs Even Cars 5 days. Hence Odd
Even Notification is ultra vires Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India. It shows that Odd Even
is nothing but political and Vote Bank Gimmick as it has been done capriciously in an unreasonable
manner.

That, Odd Even Vehicle Scheme violates Fundamental Rights of residents of Delhi and adjoining
states residents who daily commute in/out of Delhi in their four wheeled vehicles (motor cars etc.)
to do their jobs/business to earn their livelihood and is ultra vires Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution
of India.

That,Delhi Govt Odd Even Scheme is being implemented to curb the Pollution, but it’s clear that the
cause and remedy is totally mismatched; 2 Wheelers that cause the maximum pollution has been
exempted . CNG filled Private 4 Wheelers are not being exempted, there is discrimination based on
Gender(Men Cant Drive but Women can drive), Even this scheme has created a separate class of
Woman: one who can drive and one who can’t drive a 4 wheeler(yes ban that woman and put it in
Odd Even Category); this scheme take sadistic pleasure by robbing lower middle class and middle
class their right to drive to earn their livelihood by doing their jobs/business by bracketing their 4
Wheelers in Odd Even

There seems to be deliberate, intentional and strong correlation between timing of Stubble Burning,
Stubble burning farmers and their political affiliations, political parties, Diwali, Air Purifiers and Mask
making companies and timing of Odd Even Scheme .
 PRAYER

It is hereinafter most humbly prayed before this Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that in the light of
the issue raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is prayed that this hon'ble court may
be pleased to:

 to issue writ in the nature of certiorari or any or any other appropriate writ, order or
directions, to the respondent declaring Odd Even Scheme of Govt of NCT of Delhi as Void Ab
Initio and Inoperative as it is arbitrary, irritational, unconstitutional, abuse of power,
contrary to statutory provision Section 115(Power to restrict the use of vehicle) Motor
Vehicle Act 1988 (59 of 1988) and Ultra Vires the fundamental rights - equality before Law
and equal protection of law prohibition of discrimination, all citizens shall have the right to
practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business and to move freely
throughout the territory of India, equal opportunity in public employment, etc. guaranteed
under Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

AND PASS ANY OTHER RELIEF THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE, FAIRNESS, EQUTITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE, ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS AND JUSTICE THE PETITIONER SHALL BE

DUTY BOUND AND FOREVER PRAY