- (1.) THIS petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution is by Sq. Ldr. Giri Narain Raju.
(2.) ON 28-3-1970 the Air Head quarters, New Delhi issued instructions making it compulsory for the Air Force Personnel to wear crash helmets with effect from April 1 of the year. Certain enquiries were made from the Air Head quarters, which by a letter dated 10th June 1970, clarified that crash helmet was to be worn by every Air Force personnel when riding a motor cycle or a scooter, irrespective of the fact whether he was so riding on duty or off duty, whether in uniform or in plain clothes or whether riding on driver's seat or on a pillion seat. It was also made clear that the instruc tions contained therein apply equally to the rider of all forms of two wheeled motorised vehicles including motor cy cles, scooters, scooterett, mopedes and motorett cycles, but not if any of the aforementioned vehicles were attached with a side car. It was further clarified that these instructions do not apply to Sikh personnel or others who while rid ing on such conveyance wear turban. On 4-7-1973, the petitioner was found riding a scooter without wearing a crash helmet. He was required to explain his conduct. After the petitioner gave his explanation, his Commanding Officer found that he had contravened the in structions issued by the Air Headquarters and informed him about the displeasure of the Air Force Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Central Air Command. He also directed that the aforesaid warning be reflected in his annual confidential re port. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Sq. Ldr. Giri Narain Ra.iu filed this petition and prayed that the instruc tions issued by the Air Headquarters re- quiring Air Force personnel to wear crash helmets while riding two wheeled moto-rised vehicles when not on duty and the communication dated 27th July 1973 from his Commanding Officer informing him that he had incurred the displeasure of the Air Force Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Central Command, be quashed.
(3.) FIRST submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the peti tioner is that neither is there any provi sion in the Air Force Act 1950 or the Rules or Regulations framed thereunder which requires the Air Force personnel to wear a crash helmet while riding a scooter on personal business, nor is there any law which authorises the Air Head quarters to issue such a direction. Ac cordingly, the impugned instructions, were completely without jurisdiction.;