NEW DELHI -- Delhi High Court yesterday said the odd-even scheme of the AAP government was a success to some extent as the idea had appealed to the people and not because of the Rs 2000 fine imposed for violations.
A bench of justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Sanjeev Sachdeva said that while the decrease in pollution levels due to the scheme might have been marginal, but it had some "good side-effects" like reduction in congestion on roads and people's participation.
It made the observation in response to the submission of Delhi Traffic Police that the scheme was successful mainly due to the fine payable for violation.
The traffic police made the submission while defending itself against the court's assertion that its officers do not take action against violators, especially those who jump carriageways and move into oncoming lanes to get ahead during jams. Such conduct makes the traffic situation worse, the bench said.
Justice Ahmed also said he and his family missed out on a movie after they were stuck in a jam and reached the theatre three hours after leaving home when usually the journey would have taken them only 40 minutes.
DCP Romil Baaniya (Traffic HQ) said small fines of Rs 100 are not a deterrent so despite the large number of challans it has issued against violators, such violations continue.
He said there was a need to re-work the fines that can be imposed for traffic violations and sought directions from the court to the Centre in this regard. The bench, however, refused to pass any such order.
The bench said the odd-even scheme was successful, as there were fewer vehicles on road and people of Delhi participated and volunteered for it as they found the concept appealing.
It said the Delhi government was successful in publicising the concept and making it appealing to the masses and asked the traffic police to undertake a similar exercise to encourage people to follow rules.
"Think imaginatively," the court told the officer who was also asked to ensure that traffic rules are implemented.
The observations came during the hearing of a PIL on air pollution in which the court had told the traffic police to carry out better traffic management to reduce congestion and vehicular idling time, thereby reducing air pollution.
Also see on HuffPost:
Suggest a correction