Uttarakhand High Court Directs Dehradun SSP to Decide on E-Rickshaw Operations Within 10 Days
In a significant development, the Uttarakhand High Court has issued a directive to the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) in Dehradun, mandating a decision on issues related to the operation of e-rickshaws in the city within a strict 10-day timeframe. This order came during a hearing on Monday, where the court addressed petitions concerning the alleged illegal operation of these vehicles.
Court Treats Matter as Public Interest, Appoints Amicus Curiae
The single bench of Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, while presiding over the petitions, recognized the broader implications of the case and treated it as a matter of public interest. To assist in the proceedings, the court appointed advocate Dushyant Mainali as amicus curiae. During the hearing, Mainali highlighted the daily traffic congestion faced by residents, attributing part of the problem to improper parking practices despite available facilities.
He drew comparisons to traffic management strategies employed in countries like Dubai and referenced reports on state transport corporation regulations and traffic police guidelines. Mainali emphasized the urgent need for stricter enforcement of existing rules and enhanced public awareness campaigns to alleviate congestion.
E-Rickshaw Operators Raise Livelihood Concerns
Counsel representing the e-rickshaw operators in Dehradun presented their grievances to the court. They argued that the SSP had imposed restrictions on the operating hours of e-rickshaws, while similar curbs were not applied to other vehicles. This disparity, they contended, has severely impacted the livelihood of e-rickshaw drivers, who struggle to find passengers during the limited permitted hours.
The operators sought a stay on the order, urging the court to consider the economic hardships faced by the drivers. In response, the court directed the SSP to thoroughly examine these grievances and make an appropriate decision within the stipulated 10-day period.
This case underscores the ongoing challenges in balancing urban mobility with regulatory measures, as authorities grapple with traffic management while addressing the concerns of local communities and workers.
