Muhammed Ajmal K.N. v. Transport Commissioner, Regional Transport Officer and Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **THURSDAY,THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1940** ## **WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019** ## **PETITIONER:** **MUHAMMED AJMAL K.N., AGED 29 YEARS, MUHAMMED ANSARI K., KILIYANKAL (H), KAKKANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM-682030.** **BY ADVS. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SMT.K.S.SMITHA SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.** - **2 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030.** - **3 ASST. MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTOR, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030.** ## **SRI PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -2- ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, who is a contract carriage operator, in respect of his vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL-07/CJ-8402 and KL-07/CJ-8452 covered by Exts.P1 and P2 certificates of registration and Exts.P3 and P4 contract carriage permits, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent to consider and take appropriate decision on Exts.P12 and P13 requests made by the petitioner placing reliance on Ext.P9 circular issued by the 1[st] respondent Transport Commissioner. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus restraining the 2[nd] respondent from enforcing Exts.P7 and P8 check reports, till a decision is taken on Exts.P12 and P13 requests. The further relief sought for is a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent to levy an appropriate fee as provided under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 for the vehicles mentioned in Exts.P1 and P2, after ratifying the exhibition of photos on the body of the said vehicles. WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -3- 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, seeking permission to exhibit figures, graphics, etc. on the body of contract carriages covered by Exts.P1 and P2 certificates of registration and also Exts.P3 and P4 contract carriage permits, by levying appropriate fee under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, the petitioner has already moved Exts.P12 and P13 requests before the 2[nd] respondent Regional Transport Officer, which may be directed to be considered by the said respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit further that, as stated in paragraph 2 of the writ petition, in order to attract the prospective passengers the vehicles have been painted with attractive colours and with the stickers of Hollywood stars, as evident from Exts.P5 and P6 photographs. The 3[rd] respondent on 03.02.2019 intercepted contract carriage covered by Ext.P1 certificate of registration and Ext.P3 contract carriage permit WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -4- and issued Ext.P7 check report on the ground that it has been affixed with pictures on either side and also on the back side, including the rear glass to attract attention of travellers and that, the vehicle has also been fitted with violet colour lights on either side. Similarly, an Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in the office of the 1[st] respondent intercepted the contract carriage covered by Ext.P2 certificate of registration and Ext.P4 contract carriage permit, on 03.02.2019, and issued Ext.P8 check report on the ground that it has been affixed with pictures on either side and also on the back side, including the rear glass to attract attention of travellers and that, the vehicle has also been fitted with violet colour lights on either side. 4. Relying on Ext.P9 circular No.11/16 dated 12.04.2016 issued by the 1[st] respondent Transport Commissioner, the petitioner would contend that, in view of the amendment made to Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, the petitioner is entitled for affixing pictures on the body of his contract carriages, after remitting the requisite fee WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -5- as per the said Rule. 5. The photographs of the contract carriages in question, which have been issued with Exts.P7 and P8 check reports, are placed on record as Exts.P5 an P6. As evident from the said photographs, the petitioner has painted the entire body of the vehicle with gigantic figures of Hollywood stars and affixed stickers on the entire body. The petitioner has also affixed gigantic pictures on the safety glasses of the vehicle, which have to be maintained as per the mandate of Rule 100 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and fitted sliding curtains. It appears that the petitioner has also affixed sun control film on the safety glasses. The photographs would also show that, contrary to the mandate of Rule 50 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, the registration mark of the vehicles is exhibited on the left and right side of the body, on number plates, instead of painting the registration mark on the body. 6. In **Ruby v. Transport Commissioner [2019 (1) KLT 45],** this Court held that the figures and writings which WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -6- are exhibited in a transport vehicle with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract carriage or stage carriage service, squarely fall within the scope of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, attracting levy and collection of the fee prescribed under sub-rule (1) of Rule 191. This Court also held that earning of revenue by the State by the levy of fee under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules or generation of some additional income by the operator of the transport vehicle should not be at the cost of public safety and exhibition of writings or figures with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract carriage or stage carriage service should not be permitted by levying fee under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. This Court further held that while approving the matter intended to be exhibited on the vehicle, in exercise of the powers under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, the State or the Regional Transport Authority shall ensure that it does not cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. In the said WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -7- decision, this Court has also taken note of Ext.P9 circular No.11/16 dated 12.04.2016 issued by the 1[st] respondent Transport Commissioner, which was placed on record as Ext.P1 circular in that writ petition. Paragraphs 45, 46, 47 of the said decision read thus; “45. The fact that the petitioner exhibited gigantic figures of eminent international football players all over the body of her contract carriage, without obtaining permission under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules and remitting the requisite fee as per sub-rule (1) of Rule 191, is not in dispute. The photographs of the vehicle, placed on record as Ext.P3 and Ext.R2(a), would make it explicitly clear that the figures and writings are exhibited in that vehicle with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract carriage service of the petitioner, which squarely fall within the scope of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, attracting levy and collection of the fee prescribed under sub-rule (1) of Rule 191. Therefore, any demand for levy and collection of fee for exhibiting such figures and wordings on the petitioner's contract carriage, in terms of the provisions under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, taking note of Ext.P1 circular, is perfectly legal and the direction contained in Ext.P1 circular to that extent is perfectly legal. However, the question that has to be decided is WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -8- whether on payment of the requisite fee the petitioner can be granted sanction to exhibit such figures and writing on her contract carriage. 46. The exhibition of writings and gigantic figures on vehicles by its very nature are intended to attract attention, which would cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles, cyclists and even pedestrians on the public road. Driver distraction is one of the major cause of road accidents, which is a situation where the attention of the driver is diverted to any other forms of activities, which may affect the concentration of driving activity as well as the safety of the passengers and others on public road. Earning of revenue by the State by the levy of fee under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules or generation of some additional income by the operator of the transport vehicle should not be at the cost of public safety. Therefore, exhibition of writings or figures with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service should not be permitted by levying fee under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules. 47. As already noticed, the paintwork of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition, as contemplated by Rule 264 of the KMV Rules. While approving the matter intended to be exhibited on the vehicle, in exercise of the powers - under sub rule (2) of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, the State or the Regional Transport Authority shall ensure WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -9- that it does not cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. No approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the body of a transport vehicle, at places intended for exhibiting the name and address of the operator as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act; the 'emergency information panel' as per Rule 134 of the CMV Rules for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules; the name of the institution exhibited in educational institution bus and private service vehicle as per Rule 291 of the KMV Rules; etc. In the case of a stage carriage in respect of which uniform colour scheme has been implemented under Rule 264 of the KMV Rules, vide the decision of the State Transport Authority dated 04.01.2018, no approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc., over the three equally spaced white lines painted below the height of the wheel arch.” (Underline supplied) 7. In **Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [(2012) 5 SCC 321]** , after referring to the provisions under Rules 100, 104, 104A, 106, 119 and 120 of the Central Motor Vehicles WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -10- Rules, 1989 the Apex Court held that the Rules deal with every minute detail of construction and maintenance of a vehicle. In other words, the standards, sizes and specifications which the manufacturer of a vehicle is required to adhere to while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with under the Rules. What is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. It would neither be permissible nor possible for the court to read into these statutory provisions, what is not specifically provided for. The provisions of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules demonstrate the extent of minuteness in the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of vehicle, but also the safety of other users of the road. The Apex Court held further that, the legislative intent attaching due significance to the 'public safety' is evident from the object and reasons of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the provisions of the said Act and more particularly, the rules framed thereunder. WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -11- 8. In **Jijith and others v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (1) KHC 463]** this Court had occasion to consider the the question as to whether a contract carriage can be fitted with multi-colour lights, high power audio systems, etc. After considering the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder, i.e., the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules and also the provisions under the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017 made by the Central Government, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it was held as follows on the issues relating to fitness certificate; lights; internal lights; audio-visual devises; paintwork; safety glass; and registration mark. Paragraphs 8 to 14.3 of the said decision read thus; “8. **Fitness Certificate:-** The provisions under the MV Act, the CMV Rules and the KMV Rules referred to hereinbefore would make it explicitly clear that, a transport vehicle shall not be deemed to be validly registered for the purpose of Section 39 of the MV Act, unless it carries a certificate of fitness under Section 56 of said Act, read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 62 of the CMV Rules. The fitness certificate issued in Form 38 contains a WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -12- certification by the inspecting authority or the authorised testing station that the vehicle complies with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 62 mandates that renewal of fitness certificate of a transport vehicle shall be made only after the inspecting authority or the authorised testing station has carried the tests specified in the Table given in Rule 62, for checking the condition/functioning of various parts/fittings as per the relevant specifications, in order to ensure that the vehicle complies with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. Sub-section (4) of Section 56 of the MV Act provides for cancellation of a certificate of fitness, at any time, if the prescribed authority, for reasons to be recorded in writing, is satisfied that the vehicle to which it relates no longer complies with all the requirements of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. Therefore, at any time after the issuance of a fitness certificate, if the prescribed authority, for reasons to be recorded in writing, is satisfied that the transport vehicle to which it relates no longer complies with all the requirements of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, the fitness certificate is liable to be cancelled, as per the procedure contemplated - under sub section (4) of Section 56 of the MV Act. In case of violation of the standards prescribed in relation to road safety, control of noise and air-pollution, any person who drives or causes or allows to be driven, such vehicle in a public place, shall also be proceeded against as per WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -13- the provisions under sub-section (2) of Section 190 of the MV Act. 9. **Lights:-** Rule 102 of the CMV Rules deals with signalling devices, direction indicators and stop lights. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 102, the signal to turn to the right or to the left shall be given by electrically operated direction indicator lamps fitted and maintained so that, the conditions enumerated in clauses (i) to (iii) of subrule (1) are met. Rule 104 deals with fitment of reflectors. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 104, the motor vehicles specified in the said sub-rule, manufactured on or after the 1[st] day of April, 2006 shall be fitted with two reflectors, one each at the rear. Rule 105 of the CMV Rule deals with lamps. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 105, save as provided in the said rule, every motor vehicle, while being driven in public place during the period half an hour after sunset and at any time when there is no sufficient light, shall be lit with the lamps enumerated in clauses - (a) to (d) of sub rule (1), which shall render clearly discernible persons and vehicles on the road at a distance of one hundred and fifty five metres ahead. As per clause (a) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 105, a motor vehicle other than three-wheelers, three-wheeled invalid carriages and motorcycles shall have two or four head lamps. As per clause (i) of sub-rule (2), every motor vehicle other than a three-wheeler shall carry two rear lamps showing to the rear a red light visible in the rear from a distance of one hundred and fifty five metres; and as per clause (ii) WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -14- lamp, which may be the rear lamp or some other device, illuminating with a white light the whole of the registration mark exhibited on the rear of the vehicle, so as to render it legible from a distance of fifteen metres to the rear. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 105 specifies the power and height of front head lamps of a motor vehicle. As per sub-rule (4), the rear lamp shall be fixed either on the centre line of the vehicle or to the right hand side, and save in the case of transport vehicle, at a height of not exceeding one metre above the ground. As per sub-rule (5), in the case of a transport vehicle, the rear light may be fixed at such level as may be necessary to illuminate the registration mark. Rule 106 of the CMV Rules deals with deflection of lights and Rule 107 deals with top lights for every goods vehicle including trailer and semi-trailer other than three-wheelers and vehicles with overall width not exceeding 2.1 metres. 9.1. Rule 108 of the CMV Rules prohibit use of red, white or blue light. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 108, no motor vehicle shall show a red light to the front or light other than red to the rear. As per the proviso to sub-rule (1), the provisions of the said sub-rule shall not apply to the internal lighting of the vehicle; or the amber light displayed by direction indicator or top light used on vehicle for operating within the premises such as airports, ports, mines and project sites; the blinker type of red light with purple glass fitted to an ambulance van used for carrying patients or the warning lamps fitted on WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -15- Road Ambulance in accordance with Annexure I of AIS125 (Part-1)-2014; white light illuminating the rear number plate; white light used while reversing; etc. As - per sub-rule (4) of rule 108, use of multi coloured red, blue and white light shall be permitted only on vehicles specifically designated for such emergency and disaster management duties as may be specified by the Central Government. As per sub-rule (6), on and after the 1[st] April, 2018, the top lights (warning lamps) fitted on Road Ambulances shall be in accordance with AIS-125 (Part 1)2014, as amended from time to time, for all types of ambulances specified therein, till the corresponding BIS specifications are notified under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986. Rule 109 of the CMV Rules deals with parking lights with one white or amber parking light on each side in the front and two parking lights one on each side in the rear. Rule 111 deals with prohibition of spot lights or search lights on the front of any vehicle except in exceptional circumstances with the prior approval of the registering authority. 9.2. In pursuance of powers conferred under sub-rule (4) of Rule 108 of the CMV Rules, the Central Government, vide Notification No.1374(E) dated 01.05.2017 specified that the vehicles on office duty which are designated for the following emergency and disaster management duties may be allowed to use multi-coloured red, blue and white light on its top, namely, (a) the duties relating to control of fire; (b) the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -16- duties by police, defence forces or paramilitary forces for maintenance of law and order; (c) the duties relating to management of natural disasters including earthquake, flood, land slide, cyclone, tsunami and man made disasters including nuclear disaster, chemical disaster and - biological disaster. As per the said notification, t he multi coloured light shall not be put to use when the vehicle is not on the designated duty. Every year, the Transport Department of the State or Union Territory Administration, as the case may be, shall issue a public notice bringing to the notice of the general public the list of authorities to whom the permission to use the vehicles specified in clauses (a) and (b) has been granted and such vehicles shall display on its windscreen the sticker issued by such Transport Department, which shall be in the format prescribed in the notification dated 01.05.2017. As per the said notification, only one sticker shall be issued to the designated officer for one vehicle at one point of time. 9.3. The provisions under Rule 102 to Rule 111 of the CMV Rules make it explicitly clear that a motor vehicle shall be fitted with only the signalling devices, reflectors and lamps as specified thereunder. The number, position, colour and specifications of the lamps, direction indicators and reflectors are dealt with in detail in the said provisions. As per the mandate of the aforesaid provisions of the CMV Rules, the lamps, direction indicators and reflectors fitted on a motor vehicle has to WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -17- be maintained as specified thereunder, failing which it cannot be said that such vehicle complies with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. 9.4. In view of Notification No.1374(E) dated 01.05.2017 issued by the Central Government, use of multi-coloured red, blue and white light on the top of the vehicle is restricted to vehicles on office duty, which are designated for the emergency and disaster management duties specified in that notification, i.e., duties relating to control of fire; maintenance of law and order; and disaster management. Further, the multi-coloured light shall not be put to use when the vehicle is not on the designated duty. 9.5. In **Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [(2012) 5 SCC 321]** , after referring to the provisions under Rules 100, 104, 104A, 106, 119 and 120 of the CMV Rules, the Apex Court held that the CMV Rules deal with every minute detail of construction and maintenance of a vehicle. In other words, the standards, sizes and specifications which the manufacturer of a vehicle is required to adhere to while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with under the Rules. What is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. It would neither be permissible nor possible for the court to read into these statutory provisions, what is not specifically provided for. The Apex Court held further that, these WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -18- provisions demonstrate the extent of minuteness in the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of vehicle, but also the safety of other users of the road. Paragraphs 18 to 21 of the said decision read thus; “18. From the above provisions, it is clear that the Rules deal with every minute detail of construction and maintenance of a vehicle. In other words, the standards, sizes and specifications which the manufacturer of a vehicle is required to adhere to while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with under the Rules. What is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. It would neither be permissible nor possible for the Court to read into these statutory provisions, what is not specifically provided for. These are the specifications which are in consonance with the prescribed IS No. 2553 - Part 2 of 1992 and nothing is ambiguous or uncertain. 19. Let us take a few examples. Rule 104 requires that every motor vehicle, other than three wheelers and motor cycles shall be fitted with two red reflectors, one each on both sides at their rear. Every motor cycle shall be fitted with at least one red reflector at the rear. Rule 104A provides that two white reflectors in the front of the vehicle on each side and visible to oncoming vehicles from the front at night. WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -19- 20. Rule 106 deals with deflections of lights and requires that no lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor vehicle including construction equipment vehicle unless such lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of light emitted therefrom is permanently deflected downwards to such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person whose eye position is at a distance of 8 metres from the front of lamp etc. Rule 119 and Rule 120 specify the kind, size and manner in which the horn and silencer are to be fixed in a vehicle. 21. These provisions demonstrate the extent of minuteness in the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of vehicle, but also the safety of other users of the road.” 9.6. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in **Avishek Goenka's case (supra)** every motor vehicle, including transport vehicles shall be fitted with the lights which are specifically provided for in the CMV Rules and what has not been specifically stated in the said Rules would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from that Rules. Therefore, no motor vehicle, including a transport vehicle, can be fitted with lights which are not specifically provided for in the CMV Rules. 9.7. The certificate of fitness of a transport vehicle issued in Form No.38 contains a certification that the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -20- vehicle complies with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. As per the proviso to subrule (1) of Rule 62, the renewal of a fitness certificate shall be made only after carrying out the tests specified in the Table given in Rule 62. Rule 62 contemplates checking the condition of spark plug/suppressor cap/high tension cable, head lamp beams, other lights, reflectors, bulbs, rear view mirror, safety glass, horn, silencer, dash board equipment, windshield wiper, exhaust emission, braking system, speedometer and steering gear; functioning of all the aforesaid items except the reflectors, bulbs, rear view mirror, safety glasses and exhaust emission; the make/rating, etc. of spark plug/suppressor cap/high tension cable, bulbs and safety glass as per original equipment recommendations. While checking other lights it has to be ensured that unauthorised lights are not fitted; while checking reflectors it has to be ensured that the colour of reflectors and reflective tapes are as per Rule 104; while checking bulbs it has to be ensured that head light bulbs wattage, especially halogen, is not higher than those indicated in IS 1606-1993 and also that halogen bulbs with P45t caps are not used in all vehicles; while checking safety glasses it has to be ensured that laminated windscreen glass is used for vehicles manufactured from April, 1996 onwards; etc. Therefore, a transport vehicle fitted with unauthorised lights, cannot be treated as a vehicle which complies with the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -21- ## provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. 9.8. In the instant case, Exts.R5(a), R5(b), R5(c) and R6(a) photographs, the photographs produced along with the report of the inspection team, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018 produced in two compact discs would show that the petitioners' contract carriages are fitted with - unauthorised multi coloured lights and LED strips all over the body, causing distraction to other drivers and also to road users. As per the report of the inspection team, contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-44/D7473 is fitted with large number of unauthorised LED lights, flexible LED lights on wheel arches, top and bottom of the windows throughout the length of the vehicle, etc. A wiring kit installed without any sleeving or insulation is noticed at the lower end of the body. Contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-17/N-7374 is fitted with similar unauthorised LED lights, flexible LED lights (except around windows) and wiring kit without any sleeving or insulation. Contract carriage bearing - registration No.KL-45/R-959 is fitted with multi coloured LED lights inside the windscreen glass and front grill and the entire rear side of the vehicle is lit up. Evidence of removal of unauthorised LED lights, wiring, etc. was noticed by the inspection team, in all the three contract carriages. 9.9. As evident from Exts.R5(a) R5(b) and R6(a) WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -22- photographs, in addition to four head lamps, two halogen driving lamps and two fog lamps are fitted on the front of contract carriages bearing Nos.KL-17/N7374 and KL-45/R-959. Contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-44/D-7473 is having six head lamps (See: video VID20180814142745), as against the statutory requirement of four head lamps. Rule 111 of the CMV Rules prohibit spot lights or search lights on the front of any vehicle except in exceptional circumstances with the prior approval of the registering authority. As per Rule 125B of the CMV Rules, which deals with special requirement of transport vehicles that are driven on hills, such four wheeled transport vehicles as may be notified by the State Governments in the Official Gazette plying on such routes or areas on hilly terrains shall be fitted with fog lamp. 9.10. Use of flexible LED Lights, multi-colour LED lights, halogen driving lamps, etc. on motor vehicles, which are not specifically provided for in the CMV Rules, is legally impermissible, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in **Avishek Goenka's case (supra)** . Moreover, use of such unauthorised lights on motor vehicles will violate the provisions under sub-rule (1) of Rule 360 of the KMV Rules, which mandates that the driver of a motor vehicle shall at all times when the lights of the motor vehicle are in use so manipulate them that danger or undue inconvenience is not caused to any person by dazzling. The petitioners' contract carriages, which are WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -23- fitted with such unauthorised flexible LED Lights, multicolour LED lights, halogen driving lamps, etc. cannot be treated as vehicles which comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Therefore, in order to use the vehicles as contract carriages, the petitioners will have to remove such unauthorised flexible LED Lights, multi-colour LED lights, halogen driving lamps, etc. and maintain the lamps, direction indicators and reflectors fitted on their vehicles as specified in Rules 102, 104, 105, 107, 109, etc. of the CMV Rules, read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 360 of the KMV Rules. 10. **Internal lighting:-** The passenger compartment of the petitioners' contract carriages are fitted with continuously blinking multi-coloured LED/laser lights, in order to convert it as a dancing floor for the passengers. This is evident from the photographs produced along with the report of the inspection team, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018 produced in two compact discs. According to the petitioners, such lights are required to illuminate the passenger compartment of their vehicles for the benefit of the passengers, which cannot be said to be impermissible under any of the provisions of the MV Act. 10.1. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 108 of the CMV Rules, no motor vehicle shall show a red light to the front or light other than red to rear. Going by clause (i) of the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -24- proviso to sub-rule (1), the provisions under this rule shall not apply to the internal lighting of the vehicle. Rule 128 of the CMV Rules deals with special provisions for tourist vehicles, which are granted tourist permits under sub-section (9) of Section 88 of the MV Act, read with Rule 82 of the CMV Rules, by the State Transport Authority. Sub-rule (12) of Rule 128 deals with lighting of tourist vehicles. As per clause (i) of sub-rule (12), the passenger compartment of a tourist vehicle shall be adequately illuminated; arrangement shall be provided to eliminate reflection of the light from the passenger compartment on the windscreen; and in addition to the lights in passenger compartment, at least two nightlights with coloured domes, shall be provided in the passenger compartment. As per clause (iii) of sub-rule (12), one independently operated light fitting shall be provided for illumination of the driver’s or attendant’s seat area. 10.2. Clause (35) of Section 2 of the MV Act define 'public service vehicle' to mean any motor vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward, and includes a maxicab, a motorcab, contract carriage, and stage carriage. Part III of Chapter VII of the KMV Rules deals with special rules applicable to every public service vehicle other than an autorickshaw. Rule 286 of the KMV Rules, which deals with internal lighting, provides that every vehicle shall be furnished with one or more electric lights adequate to WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -25- give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment or compartments but of such power or so screened as not to impair the forward vision of the driver. 10.3. The internal lighting in a contract carriage, which is a public service vehicle, is for the purpose of providing reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment. As provided under Rule 286 of the KMV Rules, the passenger compartment of a public service vehicle shall be furnished with electric lights adequate to give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment. Therefore, the passenger compartment of a contract carriage cannot be fitted with continuously - blinking multi coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc., in order to convert it as a dancing floor. 10.4. As evident from the photographs produced along with the report of the inspection team, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018 produced in two compact discs, the passenger compartments of the petitioners' contract carriages are fitted with continuously blinking multicoloured LED lights, laser lights, etc., which is not legally permissible in view of the statutory provision referred to hereinbefore. As per the report of the inspection team, the passenger compartment of contract carriages bearing registration Nos.KL-44/D-7473 and KL-45/R-959 are fitted with DJ (Disc Jockey) rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -26- lights, etc., and the passenger compartment of contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-17/N-7374 is fitted with continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. (See: video VID20180814143538; VID201808 14143451; etc.) 10.5. Plying vehicles fitted with DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. for internal lighting will certainly cause distraction to other drivers and also to road users. Moreover, the continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. used for internal lighting in the passenger compartment pose a potential health hazard to the passengers. As per the provisions under Rule 286 of the KMV Rules, electric lights adequate to give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment alone can be provided in the passenger compartment of a public service vehicle. The petitioners' contract carriages, which are fitted with DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. for internal lighting cannot be treated as vehicles which comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Therefore, in order to use the vehicles as contract carriages, the petitioners will have to remove such DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. used for internal lighting and maintain electric lights adequate to give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -27- compartment, as specified under Rule 286 of the KMV Rules. **-** 11. **Audio visual devices:** As per clause (o) of subsection (1) of Section 110 of the MV Act, the Central Government may make rules with respect to the - placement of audio visual or radio or tape recorder type of devices in public vehicles. Clause (g) of sub-section (2) of Section 111, which empowered the State Government to make rules with respect to the placement - of audio visual or radio or tape recorder type of devices in the vehicle, was omitted by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1994. Rule 289 of the KMV Rules made by the State Government, in exercise of its power under clause (g) of sub-section (2) of Section 111 (prior to its omission), provides that no public service vehicle other than a contract carriage shall be installed with any - audio visual devices. In **George v. State of Kerala [2005 (2) KLT 717]** , a decision relied on by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, this Court held that Rule 289 of the KMV Rules framed by the State Government, in exercise of its power under clause (g) of sub-section (2) of Section 111 of the MV Act, continues to be in force until repealed or replaced by new rules framed by the Central Government. 11.1. As per Regulation 3 of the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017 made by the Central Government, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 118 of the MV Act, which deals with duty towards other road users WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -28- and general public, no vehicle shall be driven, stopped or parked on a road or in a public place in such a manner as is likely to endanger the safety of or cause inconvenience to other road users. Regulation 5 deals with duties of drivers and riders. As per clause (3) of Regulation 5, the driver shall at all times maintain a good lookout and concentrate on the road and traffic and avoid any activity which distract or is likely to distract his attention. As per clause (6), the driver shall ensure that his view is not obstructed and his hearing is not impaired by passengers, animals, load, equipment in the vehicle or by the conditions of the vehicle. Clause (10) of Regulation 5 mandates that the driver shall ensure that loud music is not played in the vehicle. 11.2. As per clause (43) of Section 2 of the MV Act, 'tourist vehicle' is a contract carriage, constructed or adapted and equipped and maintained in accordance with such specifications as may be prescribed in this behalf. Tourist permits are granted under sub-section (9) of Section 88 of the MV Act, read with Rule 82 of the CMV Rules, by the State Transport Authority. Rule 85 of the CMV Rules deals with additional conditions of tourist permit. As per sub-rule (7) of Rule 85, the tourist vehicle shall be painted in white colour with a blue ribbon of five centimetres width at the centre of the exterior of the body and the word 'Tourist' shall be inserted on two sides of the vehicle within a circle of sixty centimetres diameter. Rule 128 of the CMV Rules deals with special WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -29- provisions for tourist vehicles other than motor cabs, etc. Sub-rule (13) of Rule 128 of the CMV Rules deals with fittings and accessories. As per clause (xviii) of subrule (13), a tourist vehicle shall be equipped with public address system with at least four speakers suitably located in the passenger compartment. 11.3. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 125C of the CMV Rules, on and after the dates specified in the said rule, the testing and approval for body building of new models of buses with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver shall be in accordance with AIS: 052 (Rev.-1) 2008 as amended from time to time, for vehicles mentioned therein, till corresponding BIS specifications are notified under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986. As per the said specifications, all Type I, Type II and Type III public service buses shall be - provided with Audio/Visual or Audio Visual Information System permitting driver or recorded or digitized human speech/visual messages, to inform passengers inside the bus regarding emergency escape provisions, destination, bus stops etc., in order to enhance passenger safety. [Para.2.2.25.1 of AIS: 052 (Rev.-1): 2008 (Amalgamating amendments 1 to 8) published in May, 2017] 11.4. Neither the provisions of Rule 289 of the KMV Rules nor the provisions under AIS: 052 (Rev.-1): 2008 enable installation of high-power audio system with multiple power amplifiers, speakers and sub-woofers in a WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -30- contract carriage. Loud music from such high-power audio systems will certainly endanger the safety of other road users and will cause inconvenience to them; will distract the attention of the attention of the driver of the vehicle and impair his hearing; thereby violating the provisions under Regulations 3 and also clauses (3) and (6) of Regulation 5 of the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017. Loud music from such high-power audio systems will also violate the provisions of clause (10) of Regulation 5, which provides that the driver shall ensure that loud music is not played in the vehicle. 11.5. The passenger compartments of the petitioners' contract carriages are fitted with high-power audio systems, as evident from Ext.R6(a)(3) photograph, the photographs produced along with the inspection report, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, which are placed on record in two compact discs. As per the report of the inspection team, contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-44/D7473 is fitted with an audio system comprising of an amplified audio player, five booster amplifiers, ten - speakers/woofers, two heavy box sub woofers having 1350 watts Peak Music Power Output; contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-17/N-7374 is fitted with an audio system comprising of an amplified audio player, six booster amplifiers, an equalizer, ten speakers/woofers, - two heavy box sub woofers having 1350 watts Peak Music Power Output; and contract carriage bearing WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -31- registration No.KL-45/R-959 is fitted with an audio system comprising of an amplified audio player, four booster amplifiers, an equalizer cum amplifier, twelve speakers/woofers, etc. The high-power audio systems fitted in the petitioners' contract carriages produce loud sound, which is evident from the video clippings. (See: video VID20180814144838; VID2018081414 4818; VID20180814145251, VID20180814143321; etc.) The audio player, booster amplifiers, equalizer, etc. are installed in the driver's compartment, without eliminating reflection of light from the control panel of the equipment on the windscreen of the vehicle. 11.6. Installation of high-power audio system with multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and subwoofers cannot be permitted in a motor vehicle, since the loud sound produced by such audio systems with rating of several thousand watts of Peak Music Power Output will not only impair the hearing of the driver and the passengers, but also cause distraction to other drivers and road users. Therefore, no motor vehicle can be fitted with high-power speakers or sub-woofers with - multiple booster/ power amplifiers. Fixing high power - speakers or sub woofers, with enclosures made of wood or other materials, inside the passenger compartment of a motor vehicle cannot be permitted. Similarly, installation of DJ (Disc Jockey) sound system with DJ mixer, DJ rotating LED lights, laser lights, Karaoke systems, etc. which are typically meant for dance party, WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -32- cannot be permitted in the passenger compartment of a transport vehicle. The continuously blinking DJ rotating LED lights, multi-coloured LED/ laser lights fitted in the passenger compartment, in order to convert it as a dancing floor for the passengers, will certainly cause distraction to other drivers and also to road users. Moreover, mixing up of AC and DC power supply for such high-power audio systems with DJ mixer, DJ dancing lights, laser lights, etc., violating safety standards, poses a potential fire hazard to the passengers. 11.7. In **Forum, Prevention of Environmental and Sound Pollution v. Union of India [(2005) 5 SCC 733]** the Apex Court, in the context of noise pollution in public place vis a vis right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, observed that Indian judicial opinion has been uniform in recognising the right to live in freedom from noise pollution as a fundamental right protected by Article 21 of the Constitution, and noise pollution beyond permissible limits as an inroad into that right. People indulge in making noise beyond tolerable limits and create a health hazard unmindful of consequences which are likely to befall not only others but also themselves who create noise. Not only the use of loudspeakers and playing of hi-fi amplifier systems has to be regulated, even the playing of high sound instruments like drums, tom-toms, trumpets, bugles and the like which create noise beyond tolerable limits need to be regulated. The law enforcing agencies must be WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -33- equipped with necessary instruments and facilities out of which sound level meters conforming to the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) code are a bare necessity. 11.8. The loud sound produced by such high-power audio systems in the passenger compartment of a motor vehicle poses a potential health hazard to the passengers. The use of high-power audio system with multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and subwoofers producing such loud noise is legally impermissible in a motor vehicle, in view of the provisions under the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017 referred to hereinbefore and also the provisions under Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. Therefore, the petitioners' contract carriages, which are fitted with high-power audio system having multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and sub-woofers producing loud noise, and also DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. cannot be treated as vehicles which comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Therefore, in order to use the vehicles as contract carriages, the petitioners will have to remove such high-power audio system having multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and sub-woofers producing loud noise, and also DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. and maintain an audio system with four or six WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -34- speakers, depending upon the size of the passenger compartment, with sufficient power to distribute reasonable sound throughout the passenger compartment. 12. **Paintwork:-** As per clause (xviii) of sub-section (2) of Section 92 of the MV Act, a State Government may make rules for regulating the painting or marking of transport vehicle and display of advertising matters thereon, and in particular prohibiting the painting or marking of transport vehicles in such colour or manner as to induce any person to believe that the vehicle is used for the transport of mails. In exercise of the rule making power under the said clause, the State Government made Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, which deals with prohibition of advertisement or writing on vehicles; and Rule 264, which deals with paintwork or varnish. 12.1. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules provides that no advertising device, figure or writing shall be exhibited on any transport vehicle, save as may be specified by the State or Regional Transport Authority by general or specific order, and on payment of the fee prescribed in sub-section (1), for a period of one year or part thereof for each vehicle. As per Regulation 26 of the Driving Regulations, 2017, which deals with bar on traffic impairment, unless validly permitted by the competent authority under the MV Act or the rules made thereunder, no driver shall display any advertisement on WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -35- the vehicle. 12.2. In **Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Kochi v. State of Kerala and others (2016 (3) KHC 693)** , in the context of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, this Court held that the said Rule provides for imposition of fee not only for advertisements, but also for figures or writings. After referring to the provisions under Rule 134 of the CMV Rules, which deals with 'emergency information panel' for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods, this Court held that the writings contained in tanker trucks operated by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited by exhibiting its name in large and bold letters, even though has the characteristics of imposing with fee as prescribed under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, in view of the stipulations and prescriptions contained under Rule 134 of the CMV Rules, are not liable to be imposed with fee for such writings made on the tanker trucks. However, this Court made it clear that, if any inscriptions or writings are made on such transport vehicles inviting public attention for the products of the petitioner company, Rule 191 of the KMV Rules will come into play. 12.3. The contract carriage permits issued to the petitioners are granted under Section 74 of the MV Act. Section 84 of the MV Act deals with general conditions attaching to all permits. As per clause (g) of Section 84, the name and address of the operator shall be painted or otherwise firmly affixed to every vehicle to which the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -36- permits relates on the exterior of the body of that vehicle on both sides thereof in a colour or colours vividly contrasting to the colour of the vehicle centred as high as practicable below the window line in bold letters. Similarly, the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 have to be legibly painted on every transport vehicle, save in the case of a motor cab or any motor vehicle belonging to the State or Central Government, on the left hand side of the vehicle, in English letters and numerals, each not less than two and a half centimetres square. In the case of educational institution bus and private service vehicle, Rule 291 of the KMV Rules provides that t he name of the institution shall be written conspicuously at the top of the front and rear ends and on the left side of the body of the vehicle and the writings shall be horizontal. 12.4. Rule 264 of the KMV Rules, which deals with paintwork or varnish, provides that the paintwork or varnish of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition and in accordance with the specifications, if any, laid down by the State or Regional Transport Authority. In exercise of the powers under Rule 264, uniform colour scheme has been implemented for different classes of stage carriages operating throughout the State as City/Town Services, Mofussil/Ordinary Services and Limited Stop/Ordinary Services, vide the decision dated 04.01.2018 of the State Transport Authority. The colour scheme prescribed WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -37- as per the said decision of the State Transport Authority reads thus; - City/Town Services - Lime Green (colour value = #338e31) with three equally spaced white lines below the height of the wheel arch. - - - Mofussil/Ordinary Deep Sky Blue (colour value = Services #12bce0) with three equally spaced white lines below the height of the wheel arch. - Limited Stop - Maroon (colour value = Ordinary Services #871414) with three equally spaced white lines below the height of the wheel arch. As per the decision of the State Transport Authority dated 04.01.2018 a stage carriage shall be in the uniform colour scheme specified therein, with effect from 01.02.2018 and the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority is directed to ensure the same at the time of producing the vehicle for certificate of fitness or renewal of certificate of fitness. It is also specified that no other graphics, figures or colour schemes other than those permitted under Rule 191 (exhibition of advertisement) of the KMV Rules shall be allowed. 12.5. As already noticed, the paintwork or varnish of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition, which is the mandate of Rule 264 of the KMV Rules. If the State or Regional Transport Authority has laid down any specifications like uniform colour scheme, the paintwork of the transport vehicle shall be in WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -38- accordance with that specifications. Any figure or writing exhibited on the transport vehicle, other than the name and address of the operator to be painted or otherwise firmly affixed as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act; the 'emergency information panel' provided under Rule 134 of the CMV Rules for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules, painted on the body of the vehicle; the name of the institution exhibited in educational institution bus and private service vehicle as per Rule 291 of the KMV Rules; etc., falls within the scope of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules. Any such figure or writing exhibited on the transport vehicle with an object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service of the operator will attract the provisions of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules. 12.6. The exhibition of writings and figures on vehicles by its very nature are intended to attract attention, which would cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles, cyclists and even pedestrians on the public road. Driver distraction is one of the major causes of road accidents, which is a situation where the attention of the driver is diverted to any other forms of activities, which may affect the concentration of driving activity as well as the safety of the passengers and others on public road. Earning of revenue by the State by the levy of fee under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules or generation of some additional income WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -39- by the operator of the transport vehicle should not be at the cost of public safety. Therefore, exhibition of writings or figures with the sole object to invite public attention and to promote the contract or stage carriage service should not be permitted by levying fee under Rule 191 of the KMV Rules. 12.7. The paintwork of every transport vehicle shall be maintained in a clean and sound condition, as contemplated by Rule 264 of the KMV Rules. While approving the matter intended to be exhibited on the vehicle, in exercise of the powers under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191 of the KMV Rules, the State or the Regional Transport Authority shall ensure that it does not cause distraction to the drivers of other vehicles and also cyclists and pedestrians on public road. No approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the body of a transport vehicle, at places intended for exhibiting the name and address of the operator as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act; the 'emergency information panel' as per Rule 134 of the CMV Rules for goods carriages used for transporting any dangerous or hazardous goods; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules; the name of the institution exhibited in educational institution bus and private service vehicle as per Rule 291 of the KMV Rules; etc. In the case of a stage carriage in respect of which uniform colour scheme WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -40- has been implemented under Rule 264 of the KMV Rules, vide the decision of the State Transport Authority dated 04.01.2018, no approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc., over the three equally spaced white lines painted below the height of the wheel arch. 12.8. In the instant case, the entire body of the petitioners' contract carriages is painted with writings, graphics and gigantic human figures, etc. causing distraction to other drivers and also to road users, as evident from Exts.R5(a) and R6(a) photographs, the photographs produced along with the report of the inspection team, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, produced in two compact discs. The petitioners' contract carriages with such graphics, gigantic human figures, writings, etc. painted on the body (even at places intended for exhibiting the name and address of the operator as per clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act; the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules; etc.) cannot be treated as vehicles which comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Therefore, in order to use the vehicles as contract carriages, the petitioners will have to remove all such graphics, gigantic human figures, writings, etc., exhibited on their vehicles with an object to invite public attention WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -41- and to promote their contract carriage services, and maintain the paintwork of their transport vehicles in a clean and sound condition, as contemplated by Rule 264 of the KMV Rules. 13. **S afety glass:-** Rule 100 of the CMV Rules deals with safety glasses. As per sub-rule (2) of Rule 100, the glass of the windscreen and rear window of every motor vehicle shall be such and shall be maintained in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than 70%. The glasses used for side window are such and shall be maintained in such condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than 50% and shall conform to the standards specified in sub-rule (2). Rule 278 of the KMV Rules provides that, every vehicle shall be so constructed that save for the front pillars of the body, the driver shall have a clear vision both to the front and through an angle of ninety degrees to his right or - left hand side, as the case may be. The front pillars of the body shall be so constructed as to cause the least possible obstruction to the vision of the driver. 13.1. In **Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [(2012) 5 SCC 321]** the Apex Court prohibited the use of black films of any visual transmission of light percentage or any other material upon the safety glasses, windscreens (front and rear) and side glasses of all vehicles throughout the country. The Apex Court ordered that the Home Secretary, Director General/ Commissioner of Police of the respective States/Centre shall ensure WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -42- compliance with the direction contained in the judgment, which shall become operative and enforceable with effect from 04.05.2012. Paragraphs 39 and 40 of the said decision reads thus; “39. The manufacturer of the vehicle may manufacture the vehicles with tinted glasses which have visual light transmission (VLT) of safety glasses windscreen (front and rear) as 70% VLT and side glasses as 40% VLT, respectively. No black film or any other material can be pasted on the windscreens and side glasses of a vehicle. 27. For the reasons aforestated, we prohibit the use of black films of any VLT percentage or any other material upon the safety glasses, windscreens (front and rear) and side glasses of all vehicles throughout the country. The Home Secretary, Director General/ Commissioner of Police of the respective States/ Centre shall ensure compliance with this direction. The directions contained in this judgment shall become operative and enforceable with effect from 4.5.2012.” 13.2. In **Avishek Goenka's case (supra)** the Apex Court held further that, t he legislative intent attaching due significance to the 'public safety' is evident from the object and reasons of the MV Act, 1988, the provisions of the said Act and more particularly, the rules framed thereunder. The Apex Court noticed that use of black films certainly helps the criminals to escape from the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -43- eyes of the police and aids in the commission of heinous crimes like sexual assault on women, robberies, kidnapping, etc. If these crimes can be reduced by enforcing the prohibition of law, it would further the cause of Rule of Law and Public Interest as well. Paragraph 19 of the said decision reads thus; “19. The legislative intent attaching due significance to the 'public safety' is evident from the object and reasons of the Act, the provisions of the Act and more particularly, the Rules framed thereunder. Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that Rule 100 is capable of any interpretation, then this Court should give it an interpretation which would serve the legislative intent and the object of framing such rules, in preference to one which would frustrate the very purpose of enacting the Rules as well as undermining the public safety and interest. Use of these black films have been proved to be criminal's paradise and a social evil. The petitioner has rightly brought on record the unanimous view of various police authorities right from the States of Calcutta, Tamil Nadu and Delhi to the Ministry of Home Affairs that use of black films on vehicles has jeopardized the security and safety interests of the State and public at large. This certainly helps the criminals to escape from the eyes of the police and aids in commission of heinous crimes like sexual assault on women, robberies, kidnapping, etc. If these WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -44- crimes can be reduced by enforcing the prohibition of law, it would further the cause of Rule of Law and Public Interest as well.” 13.3. In **Avishek Goenka (2) v. Union of India [(2012) 8 SCC 441]** the Apex Court, while dismissing all applications filed seeking clarification and modification of the judgment in **Avishek Goenka's case [(2012) 5 SCC 321]** reiterated that, in terms of Rule 100 of the CMV Rules, no material including films of any visual transmission of light can be pasted on the safety glasses of the car and this law is required to be enforced without demur and delay. Paragraph 23 of the said decision reads thus; - “23. We are really not emphasizing on the security threat to the society at large by use of black films but it is a clear violation of law. Thus, we pass the following orders: - (1) All the applications filed for clarification and modification are dismissed, however, without any order as to costs. - (2) All the Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police are hereby again directed to ensure complete compliance of the judgment of this Court in its true spirit and substance. They shall not permit pasting of any material, including films of any VLT, on the safety glasses of any vehicle. - (3) We reiterate that the police authorities WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -45- shall not only challan the offenders but ensure that the black or any other films or material pasted on the safety glasses are removed forthwith. (4) We make it clear at this stage that we would not initiate any proceedings against the Director Generals of Police/Commissioners of Police of the respective States/Union Territories but issue a clear warning that in the event of non-compliance of the judgment of this Court now, and upon it being brought to the notice of this Court, the Court shall be compelled to take appropriate action under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 without any further notice to the said officers. We do express a pious hope that the high responsible officers of the police cadre like Director General/ Commissioner of Police would not permit such a situation to arise and would now ensure compliance of the judgment without default, demur and delay. (5) Copies of this judgment be sent to all concerned by the Registry including the Chief Secretaries of the respective States forthwith.” 13.4. In **Avishek Goenka's case (2)** , in the applications filed by the manufacturers and distributors of 'tinted WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -46- films', one of the contentions raised was that in the day time when 'tinted films' are pasted upon the safety glasses, still the face and the body of the occupant of the car is visible from outside. In order to substantiate the said fact, certain photographs were placed on record. The Apex Court, while dismissing the interlocutory applications observed that, the case put forward by the applicants is a case of change in law and not one of improper interpretation, which is not the function of the Apex Court, and that, the Court has interpreted Rule 100 of the CMV Rules as it exists on the Statute book. Paragraphs 17 to 19 of the said decision read thus; “17. The manufacturer and distributors have placed certain material before us, including some photographs and reports of the American Cancer Society, to show that mostly skin cancer is caused by too much exposure to ultra - violet rays. From these photographs, attempt is made to show that in the day time when the films are pasted upon the safety glasses, still the face and the body of the occupant of the car is visible from outside. It is also stated that certain amendments were proposed in the Code of Virginia relating to the use of sun shading and tinting films, on the motor vehicles. Relying upon the material relating to America, it is stated that there are large number of cancer cases in USA and the framers of the law have amended the provisions or are in the process of amending the provisions. This WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -47- itself shows that it is a case of change in law and not one of improper interpretation, which is not the function of this Court. 18. To counter this, the petitioner has filed a detailed reply supported by various documents. This shows that tinted glasses have been banned in a number of countries and it is not permissible to use such glasses on the windows of the vehicle. Annexure-A1 and A3 have been placed on record in relation to New South Wales, Australia, Afghanistan and some other countries. He has also placed on record a complete research article on the cancer scenario in India with future perspective which has specifically compared India as a developing country with developed countries like USA and has found that cancer is much less in India despite the fact that most of the Indian population is exposed to ultra-violet rays for the larger part of the day for earning their livelihood for their daily works, business and other activities. 19. This controversy arising from the submissions founded on factual matrix does not, in our opinion, call for any determination before this Court. As already noticed, the Court has interpreted Rule 100 as it exists on the Statute book. The environment, atmosphere and geographical conditions of each country are different. The level of tolerance and likelihood of exposure to a disease through sun rays or WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -48- otherwise are subjective matters incapable of being examined objectively in judicial sense. The Courts are neither required to venture upon such determination nor would it be advisable.” (underline supplied) 13.5. The provisions under Rule 100 of the CMV Rules, which deals with safety glasses, makes it explicitly clear that the glass of the windscreen and rear window of every motor vehicle shall always be maintained in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than 70%. Similarly, the glasses used for side windows of every motor vehicle shall always be maintained in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than 50%. The specifications for safety glasses, which the manufacturer of a motor vehicle is required to adhere to while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with under Rule 100 of the CMV Rules. 13.6. After referring to the aforesaid provisions in the CMV Rules, the Apex Court in **Avishek Goenka's case (supra)** prohibited the use of black films of any visual transmission of light percentage or any other material upon the safety glasses, windscreens (front and rear) and side glasses of all vehicles throughout the country. In **Avishek Goenka's case (2)** , the applications filed by the manufacturers and distributors of 'tinted films' seeking clarification and modification of the judgment in **Avishek Goenka's case (supra)** were dismissed, WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -49- repelling their contention that that in the day time when 'tinted films' are pasted upon the safety glasses, still the face and the body of the occupant of the car is visible from outside. 13.7. In view of the provisions under Rule 100 of the CMV Rules and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the decisions referred to supra, tampering with the percentage of visual transmission of light of the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows of a motor vehicle, either by pasting any material upon the safety glass or by fixing sliding 'cloth curtains', etc. are legally impermissible. No approval under sub-rule (2) of Rule 191, shall be granted for exhibition of any advertisements, writings, figures, graphics, etc. on the safety glasses of a transport vehicle, which shall always be maintained in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than that prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 100. Moreover, as per the mandate of Rule 278 of the KMV Rules, every vehicle shall be so constructed that save for the front pillars of the body, the driver shall have a clear vision both to the front and through an angle of ninety degrees to his right - or left hand side, as the case may be, and the front pillars of the body shall be so constructed as to cause the least possible obstruction to the vision of the driver. 13.8. In the instant case, Exts.R5(a) and R6(a) photographs, the photographs produced along with the report of the inspection team, and also the video and WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -50- photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, produced in two compact discs, would show that there are writings and figures on the safety glass fitted on the petitioners' contract carriages. The safety glass of the rear window of the petitioners' contract carriages is covered by gigantic human figures, thereby reducing visual transmission of light to 0% in respect of a considerably large area of the rear window. (See: Ext.R5(a); video VID20180814145841; etc.) The safety glass of the windscreen of the petitioners' contract carriages is covered by figures, writings, etc. The colour photographs produced along with the counter affidavits, the inspection report and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, produced in two compact discs, would show that the safety glass of the rear window and that of the side windows of the petitioners' contract carriages are covered by sliding 'cloth curtains' and it appears that 'sun control' film, i.e., 'tinted film' is pasted on the safety glass of the rear and side windows. 13.9. When tampering with the percentage of visual transmission of light of the safety glass of the windscreen, rear window and side windows of a motor vehicle, either by pasting any material upon the safety glass or by fixing sliding 'cloth curtains', etc. are legally impermissible, as per the mandate of Rule 100 of the CMV Rules and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the decisions referred to supra, the petitioners' contract WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -51- carriages with such writings, figures, sliding 'cloth curtains', 'tinted film' (if any), etc. cannot be treated as vehicles which comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Therefore, in order to use the vehicles as contract carriages, the petitioners will have to remove all such writings, figures, sliding 'cloth curtains', 'tinted film' (if any), etc. and maintain the safety glass in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than that prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 100 of the CMV Rules, and with a clear vision to the driver, both to the front and through an angle of ninety degrees to his right or lefthand side, as the case may be, as prescribed under Rule 278 of the KMV Rules. **-** 14. **R egistration mark:** Rule 50 of the CMV Rules, which deals with the form and manner of display of registration marks on motor vehicles and clauses (i) to (iv) deals with the specifications of the security license plate, which shall be displayed on both front and rear of the motor vehicles clearly and legibly. Clause (vi) of subrule (1) of Rule 50 specifies the size of the plates for different categories of vehicles. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 50 deals with the manner in which the registration mark of a motor vehicle has to be displayed. As per clause (a) of sub-rule (2), the registration mark exhibited at the rear of a transport vehicle shall be at the right hand side, at a distance not exceeding one meter from ground. As per WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -52- clause (b) of sub-rule (2), the registration marks shall also be painted on the right and left side on the body of a vehicle in the case of a transport vehicle. As per subrule (3) of Rule 50, registration marks shall be exhibited in two line, the state code and registration code forming the first line and rest forming the second line, one below the other. As per the third proviso to sub-rule (3), the registration mark of the light motor vehicle may be in the center with illumination. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 50 mandates that every motor vehicle except motor cab and motor car, manufactured on and from the date of commencement of the Central Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Rules, 1993 shall be provided with sufficient place in the rear for display of registration mark in two lines. Rule 51 deals with the size of letters and numerals of registration mark, which provides for the dimension of letters or figures of the registration mark and the space between different letters and numbers and letters and edge to the plain surface in the case of various motor vehicles. 14.1. As per the mandate of Rules 50 and 51 of the CMV Rules, every motor vehicle used in any public place shall display registration mark as specified in the aforesaid Rules, at the specified place. In the case of a transport vehicle, the registration mark exhibited on the rear shall be on the right hand side, as mandated by clause (a) of Sub-rule (2); the registration mark shall be painted on the right and left side on the body, as mandated by WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -53- clause (b) of sub-rule (2); and the registration mark shall be exhibited in two lines, the State code and registering authority code forming the first line and rest forming the second line, one below the other, as mandated by sub-rule (3) of Rule 50. 14.2. As per sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 36 of the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017 no vehicle shall be driven or parked on a public road without displaying registration plates as prescribed by the Act and the rules made thereunder. As per sub-regulation (2), the registration plates on the front and at the rear of the vehicle shall be clearly visible and legible and no object whatsoever or dirt shall obstruct clear view of the entire registration place. As per sub-regulation (3), no letter, word, figure, picture or symbol other than the registration number shall be displayed or inscribed or written on the registration plates. As per Sub-regulation (4), no load or other goods shall be placed on a motor vehicle in such manner as to fully or partly hide the registration plate. 14.3. In the instant case, as can be seen from Exts.R5(a) and R6(a) photographs, the photographs produced along with the report of the inspection team, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, produced in two compact discs, the registration mark exhibited on the rear of the petitioners' contract carriages is WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -54- not on the right hand side. The registration mark is not painted on the right and left side on the body, instead, the number plates are fitted over the figures painted on the body. (See: video VID201808 14145041; VID20180814143010: etc.) As per clause (b) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 50, the registration mark on the right and left side of every transport vehicle has to be painted on the body and the mandate of the said clause cannot be complied with - by affixing registration mark on the body using self adhesive stickers or by affixing number plates. In contract carriage bearing registration No.KL-45/R959, the registration mark on the front and rear is seen affixed on the body using self-adhesive stickers, instead of exhibiting it in number plates of the specified size. As per sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 36 of the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017 no vehicle shall be driven or parked on a public road without displaying registration plates as prescribed by the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. The petitioners' contract carriages without displaying registration marks as prescribed by Rules 50 and 51 of the CMV Rules cannot be treated as vehicles which comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Therefore, in order to use WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -55- the vehicles as contract carriages, the petitioners will have to display the registration marks, as prescribed by Rules 50 and 51 of the CMV Rules, read with Regulation 36 of the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017.” 9. In **Jijith's case (supra)** this Court held that, the petitioners in that writ writ petition, in order to use their vehicles as contract carriages have to remove all unauthorised flexible LED Lights, multi-colour LED lights, halogen driving lamps, etc. fitted on their vehicles and maintain the lamps, direction indicators and reflectors fitted on their vehicles as specified in Rules 102, 104, 105, 107, 109, etc. of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 360 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; remove DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. used for internal lighting and maintain electric lights adequate to give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment, as specified under Rule 286 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; remove high-power audio system installed in their vehicles, having multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and sub-woofers producing loud noise WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -56- and maintain an audio system with four or six speakers, depending upon the size of the passenger compartment, with sufficient power to distribute reasonable sound throughout the passenger compartment; remove all figures, writings, etc., exhibited on their vehicles with an object to invite public attention and to promote their contract carriage services; remove all writings, figures, sliding 'cloth curtains', 'tinted film' (if any), etc. from the safety glass; and display the registration marks, as prescribed by Rules 50 and 51 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, read with Regulation 36 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017. Paragraph 15 of the said decision reads thus; - “15. Therefore, in order to use the vehicles as contract carriages, it is for the petitioners to; - (i) remove all unauthorised flexible LED Lights, multi-colour LED lights, halogen driving lamps, etc. fitted on their vehicles and maintain the lamps, direction indicators and reflectors fitted on their vehicles as specified in Rules 102, 104, 105, 107, 109, etc. of the CMV Rules, read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 360 of the KMV Rules; - (ii) remove DJ rotating LED lights, continuously WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -57- blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. used for internal lighting and maintain electric lights adequate to give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment, as specified under Rule 286 of the KMV Rules; (iii) (iv) (v) remove high-power audio system installed in their vehicles, having multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and sub-woofers producing loud noise, and also DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. and maintain an audio system with four or six speakers, depending upon the size of the passenger compartment, with sufficient power to distribute reasonable sound throughout the passenger compartment; remove all figures, writings, etc., exhibited on their vehicles with an object to invite public attention and to promote their contract carriage services, in order to maintain the paintwork of their transport vehicles in a clean and sound condition, as contemplated by Rule 264 of the KMV Rules, and exhibit the name and address of the operator as specified in clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act, exhibit the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules, etc.; remove all writings, figures, sliding 'cloth WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -58- curtains', 'tinted film' (if any), etc. from the safety glass and maintain it in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than that prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 100 of the CMV Rules and with a clear vision to the driver, both to the front and through an angle of ninety degrees to his right or left-hand side, as the case may be, as prescribed under Rule 278 of the KMV Rules; and - (vi) display the registration marks, as prescribed by Rules 50 and 51 of the CMV Rules, read with Regulation 36 of the MV (Driving) Regulations, 2017.” 10. In **Jijith's case (supra)** this Court repelled the challenge made against the notices issued by the officials of the Motor Vehicles Department, whereby the petitioners therein were directed to produce their vehicles for inspection, after removing the unauthorised fittings, within the time limit specified in those notices, failing which proceedings will be initiated against those vehicles, which do not comply with the provisions of Chapter VII of the Motor Vehicles Act, including proceedings for cancellation of the fitness certificate. Based on the report of the inspection team, and also the video and WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -59- photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, produced in two compact discs, the 3[rd] respondent therein (the Regional Transport Officer) or the prescribed authority was directed to issue notice requiring the petitioners therein to remove the unauthorised lights, fittings, figures, writings, etc. and to display the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc. as per the relevant provisions under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, in order to ensure that their contract carriages comply with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Within three weeks from the date of receipt of the such notice, the petitioners therein were directed to produce their vehicles for inspection before the said respondent or the prescribed authority, after removing the unauthorised lights, fittings, figures, writings, etc. and displaying the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc. On such production, the said respondent or the prescribed authority was directed to conduct inspection of the vehicles by an WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -60- inspection team consisting of officers holding technical qualification, in order to satisfy that the vehicles comply with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder. If, based on the report of the inspection team, the said respondent or the prescribed authority is satisfied that the petitioners' contract carriages, which have already been issued with fitness certificates, no longer comply with all the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder, proceedings under sub-section (4) of Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act for cancellation of the certificate of fitness of the contract carriages were directed to be initiated forthwith, in accordance with the procedure contemplated under that sub-section. Paragraphs 16 to 22 of the said decision read thus; “16. Exts.P1 to P3, which are under challenge in this writ petition, are notices in printed format issued to all categories of vehicles fitted with laser/LED/neon lights and high-power audio system, which are intercepted by the officials of the Motor Vehicles Department. The use of such notices in printed format is only to ensure that the interception of vehicles fitted with such unauthorised fittings causes only least inconvenience to WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -61- the passengers. By such notices, the owner of the vehicle is directed to produce the vehicle for inspection, after removing the unauthorised fittings, within the time limit specified in that notice, failing which proceedings will be initiated against the said vehicle, which does not comply with the provisions of Chapter VII of the MV Act, including proceedings for cancellation of the fitness certificate. 17. Relying on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in **Sathyan K. v. K.K. Babu and others [2017 (3) KHC 25]** the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would contend that the issuance of Exts.P1 to P3 notices is vitiated by the principles of natural justice. The said decision of the Division Bench was in the context of Section 103 of the MV Act, which deals with issue of permits by the State Transport Authority to State Transport undertakings, in respect of a notified area or notified route. The Division Bench held that an order passed under Section 103 of the MV Act would amount to cancellation of a permit already granted. Therefore, for exercise of powers under Section 103 of the MV Act, the parties who are likely to be affected are to be heard. 18. The law laid down by the Division Bench in **Sathyan's case (supra)** has no application to the facts of the case on hand, since Exts.P1 to P3 are only notices, whereby the petitioners are required to produce their contract carriages for inspection, after WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -62- removing the unauthorised fittings, within the time limit specified in that notice, failing which proceedings will be initiated against the said vehicle, including that for cancellation of the fitness certificate. For cancellation of the fitness certificate, the prescribed authority has to initiate proceedings under sub-section (4) of Section 56 of the MV Act, if the said authority is satisfied that the petitioners' contract carriages, which have already been issued with fitness certificates, no longer complies with all the requirements of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. Therefore, there is absolutely no violation of the principles of natural justice, while issuing Exts.P1 to P3 notices, and the contention to the contra raised by the petitioners is absolutely untenable. 19. In the result, the challenge made in this writ petition against Exts.P1 to P3 notices are repelled, for the reasons stated hereinbefore. Consequently, the petitioners are not entitled for the declaratory reliefs sought for. 20. Based on the report of the inspection team, and also the video and photographs of the inspection conducted on 14.08.2018, produced in two compact discs, the 3[rd] respondent Regional Transport Officer or the prescribed authority shall issue notice requiring the petitioners to remove the unauthorised lights, fittings, figures, writings, etc., referred to hereinbefore, and to display the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc. as per the relevant provisions under the WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -63- CMV Rules and the KMV Rules, in order to ensure that their contract carriages comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, for the purpose of grant of certificate of fitness. Any violation of the provisions under the MV Act or the rules made thereunder, by the installation of an additional engine on the contract carriage bearing registration No.KL17/N-7374, allegedly without providing space for adequate cooling, shall also be pointed out in the notice issued to the 3[rd] petitioner. 21. Within three weeks from the date of receipt of the such notice, the petitioners shall produce their vehicles for inspection before the 3[rd] respondent or the prescribed authority, after removing the unauthorised lights, fittings, figures, writings, etc., referred to hereinbefore, and displaying the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc. On such production, the 3[rd] respondent or the prescribed authority shall conduct inspection of the vehicles by an inspection team consisting of officers holding technical qualification, in order to satisfy that the vehicles comply with the provisions of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder. 22. Minor defects, if any, found on such inspection shall be permitted to be rectified by the petitioners, within a time frame to be fixed by the 3[rd] respondent or the prescribed authority. If, based on the report of the inspection team, the 3[rd] respondent or the prescribed WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -64- authority is satisfied that the petitioners' contract carriages, which have already been issued with fitness certificates, no longer comply with all the requirements of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, proceedings under sub-section (4) of Section 56 of the MV Act for cancellation of the certificate of fitness of the contract carriages shall be initiated forthwith, in accordance with the procedure contemplated under that sub-section.” 11. In **Jijith's case (supra)** this Court has also ordered that the 1[st] respondent Transport Commissioner shall take necessary steps to ensure strict compliance of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder, referred to hereinbefore, taking note of the findings contained in that judgment. 12. In view of the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder, referred to hereinbefore, and in the light of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, in order to use the vehicles covered by Exts.P1 and P2 certificate of registration and Ext.P3 and P4 permits as contract carriages, the petitioner will have to; (i) remove any unauthorised flexible LED Lights, WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -65- multi-colour LED lights, halogen driving lamps, etc. fitted on his vehicles and maintain the lamps, direction indicators and reflectors fitted on their vehicles as specified in Rules 102, 104, 105, 107, 109, etc. of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, read with sub-rule (1) of Rule 360 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; (ii) remove any DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. used for internal lighting and maintain electric lights adequate to give reasonable illumination throughout the passenger compartment, as specified under Rule 286 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; (iii) remove any high-power audio system installed in their vehicles, having multiple booster/power amplifiers, speakers and sub-woofers producing loud noise, and also DJ rotating LED lights, continuously blinking multi-coloured LED lights, laser lights, etc. and maintain an audio system with four or six speakers, depending upon the size of the passenger compartment, with sufficient power to distribute reasonable sound throughout the passenger compartment; (iv) remove all figures, writings, etc., exhibited on the vehicles with an object to invite public attention and to promote the contract carriage services, in order to maintain the paintwork of their transport WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -66- vehicles in a clean and sound condition, as contemplated by Rule 264 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, and exhibit the name and address of the operator as specified in clause (g) of Section 84 of the Motor Vehicles Act, exhibit the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, etc.; - (v) remove all writings, figures, sliding 'cloth curtains', 'tinted film' (if any), etc. from the safety glass and maintain it in such a condition that the visual transmission of light is not less than that prescribed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 100 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and with a clear vision to the driver, both to the front and through an angle of ninety degrees to his right or lefthand side, as the case may be, as prescribed under Rule 278 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules; and - (vi) display the registration marks, as prescribed by Rules 50 and 51 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, read with Regulation 36 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017. 13. Within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the petitioner shall produce the vehicles covered by Exts.P1 and P2 certificate of registration and Ext.P3 and P4 contract carriage permits for WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -67- inspection before the 2[nd] respondent or the prescribed authority, after removing the unauthorised lights, fittings, figures, writings, etc., referred to hereinbefore, and displaying the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc. On such production, the 2[nd] respondent or the prescribed authority shall conduct inspection of the vehicles by an inspection team consisting of officers holding technical qualification, in order to satisfy that the vehicles comply with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder. 14. Minor defects, if any, found on such inspection shall be permitted to be rectified by the petitioner, within a time frame to be fixed by the 2[nd] respondent or the prescribed authority. If, based on the report of the inspection team, the 2[nd] respondent or the prescribed authority is satisfied that the petitioner's contract carriages, which have already been issued with fitness certificates, no longer comply with all the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act Act and the rules made thereunder, proceedings under sub-section (4) of Section 56 WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -68- of the Motor Vehicles Act for cancellation of the certificate of fitness (if the same has already been renewed) of the contract carriages shall be initiated forthwith, in accordance with the procedure contemplated under that sub-section. 15. In case of any default on the part of the petitioner in producing the vehicles for inspection before the 2[nd] respondent or the prescribed authority, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, after removing the unauthorised lights, fittings, figures, writings, etc., and displaying the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc., the prescribed authority shall initiate appropriate proceedings to ensure that the vehicles, comply with all the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act Act and the rules made thereunder. 16. It is made clear that, the time limit of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, granted to the petitioner for production of his contract carriages for inspection before the 2[nd] respondent or the prescribed authority, after removing the unauthorised lights, WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -69- fittings, figures, writings, etc., referred to hereinbefore, and displaying the registration marks, name and address of the operator, etc., will not stand in the way of those vehicles being intercepted for inspection and any notice or check report being issued for non-compliance or violation of any provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules made thereunder. 17. In view of the law laid down by this Court in **Ruby v. Transport Commissioner [2019 (1) KLT 45]** and reiterated in **Jijith and others v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (1) KHC 463]** , the petitioner is not entitled for affixing figures of hollywood stars, graphics, writings, etc. on the body of his contract carriages and also on the safety glass fitted in those vehicles, by levy of fee under Rule 191 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules and as such, the request made by the petitioner in this regard in Exts.P12 and P13 cannot be directed to be considered by the 2[nd] respondent Regional Transport Officer. For the reasons stated hereinbefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the reliefs sought for against Exts.P7 and P8 check WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -70- reports and other consequential reliefs. The writ petition is dismissed; however with the aforesaid directions. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** bpr WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -71- ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION DETAILS OF BUS NO.KL-07 CJ-8402.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION DETAILS OF KL-07 CJ-8452.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RTA, ERNAKULAM IN FAVOUR OF VEHICLE NO.KL-07 CJ-8402 ON 23.03.2017.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE RTA, ERNAKULAM IN FAVOUR OF VEHICLE NO.KL-07 CJ-8452 ON 22.03.2017.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF VEHICLE NO.KL-07 CJ-8402.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF VEHICLE NO.KL-07 CJ-8452.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE CHECK REPORT DATED 04.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE CHECK REPORT DATED 03.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.11/2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 12.04.2016.** **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.296/B2/2014/TRAN DATED 07.03.2014 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.** **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GOP NO.75/2015/TRAN DATED 21.11.2015.** WP(C).No. 7780 of 2019 -72- **01.03.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO LEVY FEES ON THE PICTURES EXHIBITED ON THE VEHICLE MENTIONED IN EXHIBIT P1. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 01.03.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO LEVY FEES ON THE PICTURES EXHIBITED ON THE VEHICLE MENTIONED IN EXHIBIT P1.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:**