Nagpur: Coming down heavily on some of the city’s top automobile dealers selling two-wheelers for not adhering to its directives, the Nagpur bench of Bombay high court on Wednesday warned them to personally remain present on February 12 or their respective establishments would be forced to shut down with the police’s help.
A division bench comprising justices Ravi Deshpande and Amit Borkar directed the dealers to come up with their respective replies during next hearing. Some of them included Tajshree, Sudarshan, Rishikesh, Arun, Nangia, KTM, Kusumgar, Paragon, AK Gandhi, Mascot, Universal, Jaika and Unnati. A majority of them had failed to file the replies to HC’s directives of previous hearing.
The stern directives came while hearing a PIL by social workers Saurabh Bharadwaj and Manish Singh Chauhan contending gross violation of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR), 1989, which makes it mandatory for them to provide two protective headgears (helmets) to the vehicle buyers for driver and pillion rider. Currently, one helmet is being provided to the customers while delivering the vehicle.
Citing CMVR’s 138 (4)(f), they pointed out that the two-wheeler manufacturer should supply two sets of helmets to the customer during purchase of the vehicle that would conform to specifications of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Act, 1986.
According to them, the failure of respondents to provide two helmets to the customers is leading to loss of precious lives in accidents. The Union and state ministries for road safety and transport along with city based Regional Transport Office (RTO) are also made respondents. Assistant solicitor general Ulhas Aurangabadkar held brief for the Union ministry while government pleader Sumant Deopujari pleaded for the state.
In its affidavit, the state supported the petitioners’ contention stating that the manufacturers and dealers should supply two sets of headgears to the customers as per rules.
The judges questioned whether the manufacturer had provided protective headgears while supplying vehicles to the dealers. “The manufacturer is not respondent in this PIL. However, the respondent agencies dealing in two-wheelers can state whether the manufacturer had supplied them protective headgears. Based on their response, it can be decided whether the manufacturers can be made respondents in this petition,” the judges said.
The petitioners prayed for directives to state transport ministry to initiate probe against RTO and file report and also asked the latter to take cognisance against the dealers and manufacturers, who failed to provide helmets to the customers.
They also demanded that the dealers should pay compensation to the family members of victims who died in road accidents without wearing helmets. They insisted on cancelling the dealerships of respondents who failed to comply with CMVR norms.
A division bench comprising justices Ravi Deshpande and Amit Borkar directed the dealers to come up with their respective replies during next hearing. Some of them included Tajshree, Sudarshan, Rishikesh, Arun, Nangia, KTM, Kusumgar, Paragon, AK Gandhi, Mascot, Universal, Jaika and Unnati. A majority of them had failed to file the replies to HC’s directives of previous hearing.
The stern directives came while hearing a PIL by social workers Saurabh Bharadwaj and Manish Singh Chauhan contending gross violation of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR), 1989, which makes it mandatory for them to provide two protective headgears (helmets) to the vehicle buyers for driver and pillion rider. Currently, one helmet is being provided to the customers while delivering the vehicle.
Citing CMVR’s 138 (4)(f), they pointed out that the two-wheeler manufacturer should supply two sets of helmets to the customer during purchase of the vehicle that would conform to specifications of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Act, 1986.
According to them, the failure of respondents to provide two helmets to the customers is leading to loss of precious lives in accidents. The Union and state ministries for road safety and transport along with city based Regional Transport Office (RTO) are also made respondents. Assistant solicitor general Ulhas Aurangabadkar held brief for the Union ministry while government pleader Sumant Deopujari pleaded for the state.
In its affidavit, the state supported the petitioners’ contention stating that the manufacturers and dealers should supply two sets of headgears to the customers as per rules.
The judges questioned whether the manufacturer had provided protective headgears while supplying vehicles to the dealers. “The manufacturer is not respondent in this PIL. However, the respondent agencies dealing in two-wheelers can state whether the manufacturer had supplied them protective headgears. Based on their response, it can be decided whether the manufacturers can be made respondents in this petition,” the judges said.
The petitioners prayed for directives to state transport ministry to initiate probe against RTO and file report and also asked the latter to take cognisance against the dealers and manufacturers, who failed to provide helmets to the customers.
They also demanded that the dealers should pay compensation to the family members of victims who died in road accidents without wearing helmets. They insisted on cancelling the dealerships of respondents who failed to comply with CMVR norms.
Get the app