Chennai, Aug 1: Noting that high-speed vehicles endangered the life of innocent citizens, the Madras High Court today suo motu impleaded the Union revenue secretary in a related matter and sought to know the basis on which such vehicles were allowed to be imported.
Justice N Kirubakaran also directed the official to get instructions on the matter and also, on whether it was possible to prohibit the import of such vehicles.
The judge was hearing appeals by the state transport corporation against the award of various amounts in favour of the claimants in a 2014 road accident, involving two buses, which left two persons dead and 29 injured.
The judge, after referring to section 112 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which had prescribed the speed limit for different classes of vehicles with effect from July 1, 1989, in his order, said, "When the permissible speed limit, as specified in the above tabular column, does not exceed 65 km per hour, it is not known as to how the Indian automobile manufacturers are allowed to manufacture vehicles fitted with high-speed engines, capable of travelling (at a speed of) much more than 100 km per hour.
"If the automobile manufacturers are prohibited from manufacturing such vehicles, the question of limiting the speed would not arise and even if the driver intends to drive the vehicle at a high speed, it will not be possible. Hence, the speeding of vehicles needs to be controlled at the threshold itself at the manufacturing stage."
The judge, while referring to various high-speed vehicles which were imported for racing, endangering not only the lives of the drivers but also the innocent public, who were either travelling on the road or walking on the pavement, directed the counsel to get instructions from the impleaded authority on the issue.
The judge then directed the secretary, Tamil Nadu transport department to ascertain the possibilities of implementing such a condition for the manufacturers and report to the court.
The judge, while reminding both the state and central authorities about the questions raised by him on July 8, 2015 and August 19, 2015, which were not answered, directed them to answer by August 21, failing which the heads of departments such as the Union secretary, transport department, secretary, state transport department, and the impleaded department have to personally appear before the court.
Comments
Add new comment