PTI
New Delhi
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) to ensure due compliance with the rule which mandates the fitting of speed governors in transport vehicles.
A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan referred to Rule 118 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR), 1989, which provides for speed governors in notified transport vehicles.
The top court, which is dealing with a matter seeking enforcement of road safety norms, said on May 13 that all manufacturers were duty-bound to fit a speed limiting device (SLD) at the time of manufacture.
It had then asked the Centre to have a meeting with the manufacturers on the issue of fitting SLDs at the time of manufacturing or delivery of transport vehicles.
During the hearing on Tuesday, the bench was informed that the Centre has filed an affidavit stating that a meeting was convened in June in this regard.
“In so far as speed governors are concerned, we are of the view that the Rules, more particularly Rule 118 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, itself mandates fitment of SLD/SLF (speed limiting function) in notified transport vehicles…,” the bench said.
“We impress upon the MoRTH to ensure due compliance of Rule 118 referred to above…,” it said.
The top court observed that what is important for the Centre as well as the states and Union territories is to see that when a transport vehicle is sold by a dealer, there has to be some mechanism to ensure that the same is fitted with SLD or SLF.
The bench also directed the MoRTH to place on record the report of its interaction with vehicle manufacturers regarding pre-fitment of vehicle location tracking device in public service vehicles.
It also asked all the states and UTs to file a compliance status report with regard to enforcement of Rule 125H of the CMVR, 1989.
Rule 125H requires all public service vehicles to have a vehicle location tracking device and an emergency button.
While hearing the matter on May 13, the apex court termed it “disturbing” that less than one per cent of transport vehicles have the vehicle location tracking device.
It had said this device would ensure the safety of passengers, more particularly, women, elderly persons and children.
After a suggestion was made before the court that this device should be provided by the manufacturer itself, the bench had in May directed the Centre to undertake this exercise of having an interaction with manufacturers and come back to it.
During the hearing on Tuesday, the top court was also informed that the Centre has constituted a National Road Safety Board in June this year.
“By the next date of hearing, we must be informed whether this Board is fully functional or not,” the bench said.
It also dealt with the issue of pedestrian crossing near the Delhi High Court.
Senior advocate Gaurav Agrawal, who is assisting the court as an amicus curiae in the road safety matter, said that a red light has been made functional there.
He argued that having a red light there may not be enough as employees of the High Court and the public have to cross the road to reach the High Court.
The amicus suggested that speed breakers and rumble strips may be added to ensure the safety of pedestrians crossing the road as vehicles would then have to slow down there.
He said the Centre may constitute an expert committee to examine vehicular movement and pedestrian flow there and suggest remedial measures.
The bench asked the counsel appearing for the Centre to look into the issue.
The Centre’s counsel said the authorities are trying to solve the issue and they will try to come up with better solutions.
“Solutions in India should be much, much better,” the bench observed.
