Supreme court on Wednesday asked the Central government whether there is a need for a change in the law on the legal question of whether a person holding a driving license for a light motor vehicle is legally entitled to drive a vehicle of a particular weight.
There is a need to “think afresh” on this matter – SC
Noting that these are policy issues affecting the livelihood of millions of people, Chief Justice D.Y. A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chandrachud said the government needs to take a “fresh look” at the issue. The bench also said that it needs to be raised at the policy level.
Complete this process in two months- SC
The top court asked the central government to complete the process within two months and inform it of the decision. The court said that any interpretation of the law must take into account legitimate concerns about road safety and the safety of other users of public transport.
The Constitution Bench had started hearing on 76 petitions regarding legal question on July 18.
The Constitution Bench is considering a legal question, “Whether a person holding a driving license of a ‘light motor vehicle’ can be entitled to drive a ‘light motor vehicle category transport vehicle’ by virtue of that license, the weight of which is The loaded luggage should not exceed 7,500 kg?” On July 18, the Constitution Bench started hearing 76 petitions regarding legal questions.
This is not a constitutional issue. This is a pure legal issue-SC
The bench said, “There are lakhs of drivers across the country who are working on the basis of the Dewangan judgment. This is not a constitutional issue. This is a pure statutory issue.” This bench also included Justices Hrishikesh Roy, PS Narasimha, Pankaj Mital and Manoj Mishra.
“It is not just a question of law, but also a question of social impact of law”-SC
The bench said, “It is not just a question of law but also a question of social impact of the law… Road safety has to be balanced with the social objective of the law and you have to see whether it would give rise to serious hardships.” We cannot decide issues of social policy on the Constitution Bench.”