KASHMIR SCENARIO EXCLUSIVE
Srinagar, September 8 (KSNN): Oblivious to the directions of an irate Supreme Court to curtail the number of VIP’s allowed to have red beacon mounted atop their official vehicles, the Jammu and Kashmir government a few days ago issue an SRO notification putting almost ‘All and Sundry’ in the red beacon list.
The Supreme Court had Monday asked New Delhi and the states to remove red sirens from vehicles of VIPs as it is in violation of law and indicated that it would pass a direction for preventing misuse of red beacon also, observing that their use was a ‘Reflection of the British Raj’.
The Court had also refused the plea of the government seeking four weeks more time to put in place rules for preventing their misuse and said that it would pass a direction regarding he issue. The miffed Court went on to say that why people who are the masters, who pay taxes and elect their representatives be allowed to have red sirens mounted atop their vehicles.
Consequent upon the directions of the Supreme Court the government of Jammu and Kashmir through an SRO notification issued a list of dignitaries allowed to have the flasher red siren mounted atop their vehicles.
The notification reads, “In order to stop misuse of red Flash lights, Traffic City Srinagar has launched a special drive from 26.08.2013 to prevent the misuse and un-authorized use of Red flash lights. The drive will continue till the Red flash lights are removed from all vehicles which are not authorized for the same.
In pursuance of SRO-No.33 dated 08.02.2007 , read with SRO-412 dated 03.12.2007, and SRO no.31 dated 25.01.2011, only the following dignitaries and officers have been authorized to use Red Flasher Lights on the top of the vehicles”.
The list besides including the names of Governor, Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister, Chairman Legislative council, Chief justice of JandK High Court, Cabinet ministers, Ministers of the state and other important dignitaries also includes Chairman Public Service Commission, District SPs, Chief Secretary.
In the SRO.31 dated 25-01-211 the state government included Vice Chairman J&K State Advisory Board for Development of Gujjar and Bakerwals, Vice Chairman J&K State Advisory Board for Development of Pahari Speaking people, Vice Chairman state advisory Board for Development of Scheduled castes, Chairman J&K State Human Rights Commission, Chairman J&K State Commissioner for Women, Chairman J&K State Vigilance Commission.
It is in clear violation of the Rule 108 clause 3 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules of 1989 which besides saying that the number of beacon vehicles, as per norms, at any given time should not exceed 50 in the center or in the state government. In pursuance of powers under clause (iii) of provision to rule 108 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, the Central Government has, vide Notification No. 52 (E) dated 11–01–2002 of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways] specified what a vehicle carrying only the high dignitaries including Ambulances, President, Vice-President, Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister,Judges of the Supreme Court, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Cabinet Ministers of the Union, Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, Leaders of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha, Chief Justices of High Courts Within & Outside their respective jurisdictions, Justices of High Courts Within & outside their respective jurisdictions, Governors of States within and outside their respective States, Lt. Governors of Union Territories within their respective Territories, Chief Ministers of States Within and outside their respective States, Cabinet Ministers of states Within their respective States, Chairman Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Commission have the permission to use flashing Red siren atop their vehicles.
The state government showing utter disregard to the directions of the Supreme Court as well as to the Central Motor Vehicles act has given permission to low profile people like District SP’s and Chairman of various bodies and Commissions, Chief Secretary, Deputy Inspector Generals of Police (DIGs) and other people to have red flasher siren mounted atop their official vehicles. The state government has shown little regard to the Rule 108 clause 3 of the Central Motor Vehicles act which states clearly that number of beacon vehicles, as per norms, at any given time should not exceed 50 in the center or in the state government. Given the list of dignitaries allowed to use red siren in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the number of official vehicles with beacon lights would exceed the permissible number of 50 by a huge margin.
“Only higher ups in the constitutional hierarchy can use red sirens. The orders of the Supreme Court are paramount. They have to be followed in letter and spirit. Central Motor Vehicles Act is applicable to the state of Jammu and Kashmir,” advocate Shabbir Nayak told The Kashmir scenario over phone.
Another advocate The Kashmir scenario talked to said that the SRO notification issued by the government runs contrary to the orders of the Supreme Court.
“This tendency is running contrary to the recommendations of the Honourable Supreme Court of India. The State of Jammu and Kashmir does not have a Motor Vehicles Act. The provisions of the Central Motor Vehicles Act are applicable to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is a violation of the orders of the supreme Court and the Central motor vehicles act,” fumed advocate Altaf Haqqani.
Many people in the legal fraternity are baffled by the fact how come the state government give a district Superintendent the permission to have Red Flasher siren on his vehicle which according to the provisions of the Central Motor Vehicles act even a Chief Secretary cannot have.
“How come a District Superintendent has the permission to use flasher Red beacon? This is total violation of the orders of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court orders have been violated. There is a clear cut provision regarding the same in Central Motor Vehicles Act,” said advocate Abdul Rehman Bhat.
A senior teacher at the University of Kashmir on conditions of anonymity said that the term ‘high dignitary’ has been liberally used by the state government all along.
“It is a saddening fact that when Supreme Court asks them to cut down the number of high dignitaries allowed to use Red Beacon, state government came up with a list including all and sundry in it. This not only is utter disrespect to the recommendations of the Supreme Court but also of the Central Motor Vehicles Act. This VIP culture is wreaking havoc with the very concept of democracy. It is a symbol of colonialism which must be discarded,” he said while pleading anonymity.
While the state administration is trying its best to evade questions in this regard, an angry Mehraj kakroo, Commisioner Secretary Transport told The Kashmir Scenario that the if state was giving any one permission to use red sirens it was under some guidelines.
“Well I guess we know Central Motor Vehicles Act better than you. It is the job of the government to see what is right and what is wrong. If a Superintendent of Police is using a Red Beacon it is under the guidelines of the Act,” an angry Mehraj Kakroo told The Kashmir scenario.
“Well an SRO was issued by the government and let me tell you a Superintendent of Police can also use red beacon. This SRO was issued keeping in view the guidelines of the honorable Supreme Court and this list may be revised in future,” kakroo added while not revealing the exact date when the list would be revised.
The Supreme Court while rejecting the central government’s demand to give it four months for revising the list said that Red sirens are a symbol of ‘colonial British raj’ and it was in the interest of a democratic state of India to discard all such symbols of colonialism.
The bench in a terse reminder to the central and the state governments, asked how a beacon could enhance an official’s capacity to work, and made it clear that everyone with a minister’s status does not also become a high dignitary. The bench sought a categorical definition of the term “high dignitaries,” underlining that a very “liberal” use of this term could not be made the basis of differentiating between ordinary citizens and others.