- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Ensure social distancing after resuming operations: HC to Delhi Metro
The Delhi High Court on May 20 directed the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) to ensure that adequate steps are taken to maintain social distancing after the lifeline of the national capital is back on track.“It shall be the duty of the DMRC to ensure that adequate steps are taken to maintain social distancing once the Metro Rail is permitted to function, particularly, since DMRC has...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Delhi High Court on May 20 directed the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) to ensure that adequate steps are taken to maintain social distancing after the lifeline of the national capital is back on track.
“It shall be the duty of the DMRC to ensure that adequate steps are taken to maintain social distancing once the Metro Rail is permitted to function, particularly, since DMRC has become the lifeline for the citizens of Delhi and the NCR region and invariably, the compartments are packed to the gills, which can be dangerous in the current COVID-19 pandemic situation,” said a division bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Subramonium Prasad.
The observation came in while the court was hearing a petition filed by Shreesh Chadha seeking court’s direction to the Centre and Delhi government to operate all the modes of public transport in all districts of the national capital. It also sought court’s direction for framing of guidelines for hygiene of commuters and operators of these public transports.
During the course of hearing, the Delhi government through its counsel informed the court that as of now, there is adequate public transport that has been permitted to be operated to meet the requirement of the public at large. As and when the lockdown is further relaxed, the DMRC shall also be permitted to operate the Metro Rail in terms of the directions that may be issued by the respondents subsequently, the government said.
“Intra-state movement of DTC as well as cluster buses have been permitted with a condition that not more than 20 passengers shall be allowed at one time inside the bus. The Transport Department has been directed to deploy adequate number of buses to ensure social distancing inside the bus,” said Shadan Parashar and Bharat Gupta told the court.
Advocates Pushkar Sood and Satya Prakash appearing for the DMRC appraised the court about Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) formulated by the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs for Metro operation after restoration of the its services.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Maninder Acharya representing the Union of India and Advocate Shadan Parashar, counsel for state government said that the grievance of the petitioner has been adequately addressed.
After hearing the matter at length, the court disposed off the petition. “We may note that it has been just two days since the new rules and regulations have come into force. It is too early in the day for learned counsel for the petitioner to urge that there is an inadequate supply of public transport for insisting that DMRC must be directed to operate the Metro Rail in Delhi immediately,” the court noted. “As of now, there is adequate public transport that has been permitted to be operated by the Government of NCT to meet the requirement of the public at large. As and when the lockdown is further relaxed, the DMRC shall also be permitted to operate the Metro Rail in terms of the directions that may be issued by the respondents subsequently,” it added.