<p class="title">The Supreme Court is to hear on Friday a plea against the Delhi government's odd-even road rationing scheme, alleging that it was arbitrary, contrary to statutory provisions and was nothing but a "political and vote bank gimmick".</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petition, filed by a Noida-based advocate, Sanjjiv Kumar, has alleged that the Delhi government's November 1 notification on the scheme also violated fundamental rights of residents of Delhi and adjoining states who daily commute in and out of the capital city for their jobs or business.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner questioned the rationale behind the scheme, saying data on Delhi's air quality, including those by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC), have confirmed that in the past the odd-even rule did not lower pollution levels in the national capital.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench of justices Arun Mishra and Deepak Gupta had on November 4 questioned the Delhi government as to what it was achieving from the odd-even scheme by stopping plying of cars that are less polluting compared to two and three-wheelers and taxis.</p>.<p class="bodytext">"Let the Government of NCT of Delhi explain this aspect and file data in this regard in the court on the basis of the previous experience and whether three-wheelers and taxies are plying more on roads during such restrictions and relevant data be placed," the bench had said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">"During odd-even scheme, what is the difference being caused by stopping use of four-wheelers when various other contributory factors are not taken care of by the government of NCT of Delhi," it had said.</p>
<p class="title">The Supreme Court is to hear on Friday a plea against the Delhi government's odd-even road rationing scheme, alleging that it was arbitrary, contrary to statutory provisions and was nothing but a "political and vote bank gimmick".</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petition, filed by a Noida-based advocate, Sanjjiv Kumar, has alleged that the Delhi government's November 1 notification on the scheme also violated fundamental rights of residents of Delhi and adjoining states who daily commute in and out of the capital city for their jobs or business.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The petitioner questioned the rationale behind the scheme, saying data on Delhi's air quality, including those by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC), have confirmed that in the past the odd-even rule did not lower pollution levels in the national capital.</p>.<p class="bodytext">A bench of justices Arun Mishra and Deepak Gupta had on November 4 questioned the Delhi government as to what it was achieving from the odd-even scheme by stopping plying of cars that are less polluting compared to two and three-wheelers and taxis.</p>.<p class="bodytext">"Let the Government of NCT of Delhi explain this aspect and file data in this regard in the court on the basis of the previous experience and whether three-wheelers and taxies are plying more on roads during such restrictions and relevant data be placed," the bench had said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">"During odd-even scheme, what is the difference being caused by stopping use of four-wheelers when various other contributory factors are not taken care of by the government of NCT of Delhi," it had said.</p>
