Supreme Court Directs Implementation of Parking Policy to Ease Congestion: M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 785 (2 September 2019)

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: 2 September 2019
Citation: (2019) INSC 785
Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta.

Can the lack of parking space disrupt the social fabric of neighborhoods? The Supreme Court of India, recognizing the increasing conflicts over parking, has issued a detailed order to address this mundane yet critical issue. The judgment highlights the growing problem of inadequate parking, especially in residential areas, and directs authorities to implement effective parking policies. This order aims to ensure a more dignified life for citizens, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, by addressing the chaos caused by haphazard parking.

Case Background

The judgment notes that until the late 1970s, cars were a luxury, and most car owners had garages. However, with economic growth, the number of vehicles has increased dramatically. Simultaneously, due to space constraints and rising land prices, houses have become smaller, and garages have been converted into living spaces. This has led to cars being parked on driveways and, eventually, spilling onto the roads.

Municipal authorities have also contributed to the problem by permitting additional constructions without assessing the carrying capacity of areas. This has resulted in a significant increase in the number of vehicles per household, far exceeding the available parking space. The lack of proper parking facilities has led to conflicts among neighbors and has made it difficult for emergency vehicles to move freely. The petitioner, M.C. Mehta, sought the intervention of the Supreme Court to address this issue.

Timeline

Legal Framework

The Court refers to the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules of 2019, which were drafted in exercise of powers conferred under Clause 41 of Section 2, read with Section 117, sub-section (3) of Section 127, and clauses (e), (h), and (i) of sub-section (2) of Section 138 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The policy prioritizes pedestrians and cyclists, followed by mass public transport, emergency vehicles, vehicles for differently-abled persons, and then personal motor vehicles. It also emphasizes that parking arrangements should not hinder the free movement of traffic.

Clause 11 of the policy deals with parking in residential streets and lanes, mandating that area parking plans include parking arrangements within residential areas, made in consultation with residents or Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs). It also encourages the development of open areas (excluding designated green areas and parks) as parking lots on a payment basis, and the use of vacant plots for parking, with appropriate tax incentives. The policy strictly prohibits parking on footpaths and requires that a lane be earmarked for emergency vehicles.

The relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as mentioned in the judgment, are:

• Section 117: Power to erect traffic signs
• Section 127(3): Parking places and halting stations
• Section 138(2)(e): The nature of the signals to be carried, and the appliances to be fitted, on vehicles for signalling their approach or movement.
• Section 138(2)(h): The conditions subject to which, and the times at which, vehicles may be left standing in any street or public place.
• Section 138(2)(i): The installation and use of weighing devices.

Arguments

The Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority (EPCA), in consultation with the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), earmarked Lajpat Nagar for a pilot project to address parking issues. Similar projects were also planned for Kamla Nagar and Krishna Nagar by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) and the East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC), respectively.

The EPCA suggested issuing parking permits to residents with monthly charges, but the Government of NCT opposed this. However, the court noted that residents should at least share the administrative costs for stickers and security.

The Transport Department of the NCT of Delhi notified the draft for Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules of 2019, which prioritizes pedestrians, public transport, and emergency vehicles over personal vehicles. The policy also encourages the use of open areas and vacant plots for parking.

The EPCA’s report for the Lajpat Nagar pilot project indicated a demand for 3510 parking spaces, while only 1830 legal spaces were available. The EPCA identified alternative spaces, including shared parking with hospitals and educational institutions, to accommodate the remaining vehicles.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame issues in a separate section. However, the issues addressed by the Court can be summarized as:

1. How to address the acute shortage of parking space in residential areas?
2. What measures should be taken to implement the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules of 2019?
3. How to ensure that parking arrangements do not hinder the free movement of traffic and emergency vehicles?
4. How to utilize available space effectively for parking, including open areas, vacant plots, and shared parking?
5. How to prevent encroachments on footpaths and ensure they are usable by pedestrians?

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The Court considered the following authorities:

Judgment

The Court’s judgment provides a comprehensive approach to address parking issues in Delhi, focusing on both immediate relief and long-term solutions.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the need to address the growing parking crisis in Delhi, which is disrupting the social fabric of neighborhoods and hindering the free movement of traffic and emergency vehicles. The Court emphasized the importance of implementing a comprehensive parking policy that prioritizes pedestrians, public transport, and emergency vehicles, while also addressing the needs of personal vehicle owners. The Court also highlighted the need for innovative solutions, such as shared parking, multi-level parking, and the use of technology, to maximize the use of available space.

The court’s reasoning was based on a combination of factual analysis of the parking crisis and legal considerations, with a slightly higher emphasis on legal aspects.

The Court considered various alternative interpretations, such as leaving the matter entirely to the discretion of the municipal authorities. However, it rejected this approach, emphasizing the need for a structured and comprehensive solution to address the parking crisis. The Court also considered the financial implications of implementing the parking policy, noting that the State must ensure that roads are free and clear, and that reasonably large parking spaces are available to citizens.

The Court’s decision is a balanced approach, combining immediate measures with long-term planning to address the parking crisis in Delhi. The decision is based on a combination of legal principles, factual analysis, and practical considerations.

The Court’s reasoning is supported by the following quotes from the judgment:

• “Proper parking policies will also lead to less pollution, less crime and a better and more dignified life which every citizen is entitled to under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
• “Parking on footpaths shall be strictly prohibited and civic agencies shall tow such illegally parked vehicles.”
• “It is the responsibility of the State to ensure that the roads are free and clear, free from parking and that there is reasonably large amount of parking space available to citizens in residential areas, commercial areas, institutional area, transport hubs etc.”

There were no dissenting opinions in this case.

Key Takeaways

• Municipal authorities must clear all encroachments from pavements in residential areas.
• The Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules 2019 must be notified and enforced.
• The government must assess parking needs for the next 25 years while granting building permissions.
• EPCA and municipal authorities should consider the judgment while evaluating pilot projects.
• The government should consider introducing RFID tags, parking guidance systems, and last-mile connectivity.

The judgment has significant implications for future cases involving parking regulations and urban planning. It sets a precedent for prioritizing pedestrian safety, public transport, and emergency services while addressing the needs of personal vehicle owners. The emphasis on technology-driven solutions and innovative parking methods is also likely to influence future policy decisions.

Directions

The Supreme Court issued the following directions:

1. The New Delhi Municipal Corporation, North Delhi Municipal Corporation, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, East Delhi Municipal Corporation, and Delhi Cantonment Board are directed to ensure that all pavements in residential areas are cleared of encroachments.
2. The draft rules of the Delhi Maintenance and Management of Parking Places Rules 2019 must be notified by 30.09.2019.
3. All concerned authorities must ensure that the notified rules are enforced in letter and spirit.
4. The Government of NCT is directed to ensure that while granting permission to build any structure, there is proper assessment of the parking needs for the next 25 years.
5. EPCA and the municipal authorities must consider the judgment while evaluating the feasibility and effectiveness of the pilot project.
6. The Government of NCT, municipal authorities, and EPCA are directed to consider the viability and effectiveness of introducing RFID tags, parking guidance systems, and last-mile connectivity.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that the State has a responsibility to ensure that roads are free from parking and that there is adequate parking space available to citizens. The judgment reinforces the importance of a comprehensive parking policy that prioritizes pedestrians, public transport, and emergency vehicles. It also emphasizes the need for innovative and technology-driven solutions to address the growing parking crisis. This judgment marks a significant development in the law relating to urban planning and parking management.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India provides a comprehensive framework for addressing the parking crisis in Delhi. By directing the implementation of a parking policy, emphasizing pedestrian safety, and encouraging innovative solutions, the Court aims to create a more organized and livable urban environment. The judgment highlights the State’s responsibility to ensure adequate parking and sets a precedent for future cases involving urban planning and parking management.