Lawyers call off strike, protest march against traffic challan amendments

Singh said the representation was being sent to the Transport department for examination, and would also be brought to the notice of the Lieutenant Governor and the Chief Minister. Till then, he said, the department was being directed to put the implementation of the notification, dated September 14, on hold.

According to a circular issued by the Coordination Committee of All District Courts Bar Associations of Delhi, a delegation of the committee was called for a discussion with the Chief Minister, the Law Minister and the Transport Minister. It said a “detailed discussion on the grievances and concerns of the legal fraternity” regarding the new mechanism for disposal of traffic challans was held.

“After detailed deliberations, the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Delhi has been pleased to put on hold the implementation of the said notification in the state of NCT of Delhi until a concrete resolution is arrived at after due deliberation and consideration of the suggestions and concerns raised by the Coordination Committee,” the circular stated.

“Accordingly, the call for abstention from work and the proposed protest march on 24.09.2026 stands suspended,” the circular said, adding that the association would remain firm on its stand till the notification is rolled back.

Lawyers had also questioned why an executive, rather than a court, would first decide whether a challan should be accepted, saying this gives the executive a role that should belong to the judiciary.

The changes were made to Rule 167 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, and were flagged by the coordination committee in a September 20 circular.

Under the amended Rule 167(5), a person issued a challan must either accept and pay the amount or contest it through the prescribed portal, along with documentary evidence, before the authority specified by the state government, within 45 days of the challan being issued, the circular stated.

If a person does not contest the challan before the specified authority, it will be “deemed to have been accepted”.

The most contentious provision, according to the lawyers, was that where a person’s submissions are rejected, they are required to approach the competent court only after depositing 50% of the amount specified in the challan, in a manner prescribed by the state government.