[ValarMorghulis]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

I was always under the impression that one needs to have 10th pass certificate to get the drivers license. To get a Learner's license, one needs to pass the written test right?

+1
Why all the hulla-baloo for the verdict? The court was only implementing an existing rule!
Just because there was a mistake in issuing DLs to these folks doesn't make it alright to not rectify it!

[VeluM]

Originally Posted by hserus

More to the point - is there any text in the current motor vehicle act or rules that specifies literacy as a criterion to grant or not grant a license?

Without it the judge has overstepped his mandate.

(4) Where the application is for a license to drive a transport vehicle, no such authorisation shall be granted to any applicant unless he possesses such minimum educational qualifications as may be prescribed by the Central Government and a driving certificate issued by a school or establishment referred in section 12.

Source.

The petitioner had applied for a transport license.

I stand corrected about the private license requirements, however IMHO this minimum educational qualification should be extended to private licenses as well.

Obviously the court has not overstepped its mandate.

To those stating that they are illiterate when out of state, please do check the definition of illiteracy, which is not in question.

We are not debating the languages of road signs, but the need for literacy and a minimum education requirement for licensing.

[kaushal21fb]

Driving is a privilege and not a fundamental right.

We human's have a paradox that we seem to think, we understand other humans based on our own perspectives. So all literates feel they know what all illiterates are all about and the other way.

Now think of it this way. If you were to go to a doctor who says "I'm illiterate, but I've practiced it on many animals and some humans too, so I (knida in my unscientific way) know what I'm doing". Will you allow the doctor to treat you?

So if someone says, "I know how to de-clutch and turn that steering wheel. However I've never taken a lesson or (because they ask you to read) been to road safety class, I hardly know what the vehicle (what is BHP? and what is seatbelt/helmet?) is all about and nobody told me about those road signs, most of which have at least one language written on, heck i don't know if they're important". That person is driving behind you or side or front.

The sad part is there are many of such persons, because our roads are a system of corruption. No doubt, we need to set the system right first. But at some point in time we'll need to think about removing the illiterate and unfit too. Because we want to be safe on roads and driving is not a fundamental right.

[NiInJa]

The judgement, although I agree with it, leaves more questions than answers on the table. I just wish it was more precise and proper steps were laid out. Typical Indian way of making general statements and let people make their own assumptions around it.

First, if a pedestrian is illiterate and he cannot read any signs, isn't he a menace to the society and should not be allowed to walk as he might cause accidents ?

Second problem is how to define illiterate/semi-literate/literate, educated/uneducated/partially educated person at the time of application of driving license ? How does the RTO determine that while issuing license ? By verifying his school certificate ? And, is that enough ? Because people who can read and write too are 'menace' sometimes.

To give an example, my dad's office car driver was just 4th pass and he was a truck driver in the 90s before becoming a car driver for state government. According to my dad, He was perhaps the best driver he had ever seen showing a lot of patience and following rules and regulations to the T. So would we reject his license because he never cracked 10th standard exam ? Another example- a highly educated individual in our society rammed his car into a tree killing himself and two others 15 years ago, probably would have saved himself if he had 'read' the user manual, specifically, the topic of driving within speed limits.

I might be wrong but by the time people reach 18 and get eligible for a driving license, they are not completely 'illiterate' (can't read or write) and the fact that they are applying for a license knowing they have to attempt exams later shows they must have done 'some' study (as in, can read and write). Totally dumb people might not make it, if they can't read, they won't exactly understand signs too.

So my stand would be to make driving license theory exams so tough (including subjects on how to use navigation, reading general notices on highways, reading vehicle user manuals, insurance document etc.) that applicants will be forced to take primary and secondary education (upto 10th) seriously. Then it should be followed with even tougher driving tests.

[.HEM]

Here in Chennai, the school transfer certificate is a must. When I insisted on other document for Age proof the Driving school was adamant in getting the copy of the School TC.

During a casual chat with my driving school owner, he informed that the minimum qualification is 8th standard for heavy vehicles licence in TN and they have a very different procedure to follow to get the license. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I can vouch 99% of the 2 wheeler riders in India, do not know the basic traffic rules and the signals to be followed while riding a bike on road.

[chaudh2s]

Originally Posted by Thilak29

That's some wisdom!

You need to know two things, the constitution clearly states that one can not be deprived of resources (public road being one) among one of the six fundamental rights.

When was this clause added to the fundamental rights defined in the Constitution of India?
Am surprised, these days people start perceiving just about anything, as their fundamental right.
For the information of masses, the fundamental rights are:
1.) Right to equality
2.) Right to freedom
3.) Right against exploitation
4.) Right to freedom of religion
5.)Cultural and Educational Right, and
6.) Right to constitutional remedies
Right to use road, electricity, water, sanitation, etc. are not our fundamental rights.

[Thilak29]

Originally Posted by chaudh2s

When was this clause added to the fundamental rights defined in the Constitution of India?
Am surprised, these days people start perceiving just about anything, as their fundamental right.
For the information of masses, the fundamental rights are:
1.) Right to equality
2.) Right to freedom
3.) Right against exploitation
4.) Right to freedom of religion
5.)Cultural and Educational Right, and
6.) Right to constitutional remedies
Right to use road, electricity, water, sanitation, etc. are not our fundamental rights.

Right to equality - you have answered yourself.

[chaudh2s]

Originally Posted by Thilak29

Right to equality - you have answered yourself.

The right to equality includes equality before law, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, gender or place of birth, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment, abolition of untouchability and abolition of titles.

Am still not sure, if the right to equality means, you have right to resources like roads, etc. If that is how it is meant to be, then there is no point in making laws for anything. That way everybody has right to do anything as everybody is equal. There is no need to pass 12th grade to get admission to a university, no need to have a passport to travel abroad, etc. etc.

Personally, I believe its a good decision by court. There should be a minimum education threshold (in addition to a test for common sense, general mental ability or something similar) to be granted a license to drive.

[padmrajravi]

Originally Posted by Thilak29

Right to equality - you have answered yourself.

No sir. Right to equality is about discrimination based on race, religion, gender, caste or birth place. Discrimination based on education and experience is the whole basis of our corporate careers and promotions.

[i74js]

When the so called illiterates are able to use smart phones these days, what is stopping the government / RTO to let them drive?

Certain capacity building may be required, which even companies in commercial transportation space can organise as part of their CSR activities but a blanket "No" cannot be appreciated.

Another parallel could be the ECR on the passports of labor class / illiterates which provide them additional support from the immigration officials when they travel abroad. There are ways and means to address situations - simple knee jerk because of some episode / instance is uncalled for !

[Thilak29]

Originally Posted by padmrajravi

Right to equality

Originally Posted by chaudh2s

The right to equality

I don't wish to derail the topic, however, would like to point out that any discrimination violates the right to equality. Also, note that the socialist guiding value of the constitution as part of the 42nd amendment, every citizen has an equal right to share the resources of the country.

[VeluM]

Originally Posted by Thilak29

I don't wish to derail the topic, however, would like to point out that any discrimination violates the right to equality. Also, note that the socialist guiding value of the constitution as part of the 42nd amendment, every citizen has an equal right to share the resources of the country.

Again, this is not prohibiting the use of a road. The court hasn't said that the petitioner or other illiterate applicants cannot use a road. They may certainly use it by means that do not require a transport license, such as a personal motor vehicle, or cycle.

Additionally, every qualifying criterion cannot be deemed discriminatory, else everyone should be equally eligible for promotions regardless of position, education, experience, or performance in any institution. A ridiculous notion, you would agree. Similarly a minimum qualification requirement as laid out in the law (the court hasn't come up with a new law) cannot be deemed discriminatory. It might be pointed out that if one does feel it is discriminatory, the law and minimum requirements for transport license themselves may be challenged in the higher courts of the state/country.

[Alfresco]

Seeing some of the posts it would seem that the illiterate truck driver starts from Jaipur in Rajasthan to go to Silchar in Assam without having an iota of knowlegde of where he is going!
He has been entrusted with goods worth lakhs by the transport company with the complete understanding that he won't be able to reach his destination!

Wow betide all those pioneers who breached new frontiers without signposts!

I think it's quite irrelevant in the age of Google Maps.

[Waspune]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

I was always under the impression that one needs to have 10th pass certificate to get the drivers license. To get a Learner's license, one needs to pass the written test right?

Even I was under the same impression! Once we had hired a Xylo (yellow plate) from Delhi-Kasol-Manali-Delhi. That driver also told me that 10th pass is the minimum pre-requisite to get a commercial DL though it is not followed. He was a 10th pass out.
The thing is everyone has a vested interest here. If Govt. actually follows it in a stringent way then the number of drivers would reduce, unemployment would increase, car sales would decrease.
Now lets come to private DL. Here also if everyone is given a license only after a proper test (written+practical) then the number of DLs issued would drop -> number of drivers would drop -> car sales would drop.
Auto industry is said to account for around 12% of our GDP.

[riteshritesh]

Originally Posted by Alfresco

Seeing some of the posts it would seem that the illiterate truck driver starts from Jaipur in Rajasthan to go to Silchar in Assam without having an iota of knowlegde of where he is going!
I think it's quite irrelevant in the age of Google Maps.

I smell a bit of sarcasm there,but can't figure it out .

'These' drivers start off as 'cleaners/assistants/khalasi' and learn the routes due to habit and not by reading off Road markers/Destination Boards. This is the reason, whenever you call a truck driver and ask for estimated time of arrival, the illiterates will say 2 hours even if he is 600 kms away, whereas the literates will tell you that he is 600 kms away and depending on traffic, he should reach by so and so time.


Google Maps for illiterates? How will they use it if they can't read?


People against the decision, are only considering Road signs but not Distance markers. Non Readers ought to be put in school and taught, rather than behind the wheel.