In a recent legal development, the Supreme Court has mandated that the Central government reevaluate its policy allowing individuals with a driving license for light motor vehicles (LMV) to operate transport vehicles weighing up to 7,500 kg. 

The constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy, PS Narasimha, Pankaj Mithal, and Manoj Misra, has set January 17 as the final date for this reassessment.

Attorney General for India, R Venkataramani, informed the court about the government's intention to adopt a comprehensive approach rather than making incremental amendments to address the issue. He assured that all necessary consultations would be concluded before the budget session of Parliament in February.

The court expressed hesitance to indefinitely postpone the proceedings, citing concerns about fairness to insurance companies. This reluctance led to the decision to schedule further deliberations on January 17, 2024. The court emphasized that unless a definitive decision on the law is reached by that date, the judgment in the Mukund Dewangan case, which determined that transport vehicles under 7,500 kg are not exempt from the definition of LMV, would remain in effect.

The case revolves around the legal question of whether individuals holding a driving license for a light motor vehicle are entitled, based on that license, to operate a transport vehicle of the light motor vehicle class with an unladen weight not exceeding 7,500 kg. This question was referred to a Constitution Bench due to variations in the eligibility criteria for obtaining a license under the two categories outlined in different provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Constitution Bench is currently addressing 76 petitions related to this matter. In July, it was highlighted that considering the perspectives of the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways was crucial, as the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment in the Mukund Dewangan case had been acknowledged and accepted by the Central government.

On September 13, the court granted the Central government a two-month duration to provide a response. Despite Attorney General Venkataramani's request for an indefinite adjournment based on ongoing consultations, the court directed the government to conclude the necessary consultations and exercises before the specified deadline of January 17. Failure to reach a resolution by that date could lead to the case being left pending indefinitely, extending into subsequent months such as March and April.