Amar Taxi Service and Others vs Commissioner of Police and Others

Sanjiv Khanna, J.—Learned Counsel for the MCD and Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic) seek and are granted permission to place on record status reports.

As per the status reports, a general taxi stand has been notified for parking of five DLT taxis in the area in question. As per the status report, DLY and DLZ taxis were found to be parked at the site in question and area meant for public parking has been encroached upon. It is open to the respondents to take action as per law against the DLY and DLZ taxis which are parked at the site contrary to the terms of the notification. Respondents will ensure that the space meant for general car parking is not encroached upon by taxis.

A general notification for parking of five DLT taxis has been issued. No particular person can claim exclusive right to park his taxi in the area meant for general parking of taxis. Respondents will ensure that no particular individual/person claims or asserts right to park his taxis and thereby prevent other taxi owners/drivers from parking their taxi in the area earmarked for general taxi stand. Further, officers of the respondents and those manning the pre-paid booths will ensure that taxi drivers operate their taxis and do not use the said area as a permanent parking place. DLT taxis are meant to ferry users and move around. Taxi owner/driver while waiting for a passenger can park their vehicles at designated general taxi stands. It has been clarified by the respondents that area/space is demarcated as a general taxi stand or parking area for taxis but no person or individual can claim allotment or right to park in the said space to the exclusion of others.

Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic) in the status report has pointed out that a few persons have been continuously and permanently parking their taxis in the taxi stand. It is further stated that some of them own more than one taxi. It is open to the respondents to take action as per law in such cases.

It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on whether or not the taxi stand should be denotified. It is open to the respondent to denotify the taxi stand, if required and necessary, in accordance with law.

Writ Petitions are accordingly disposed of.