Apex Court sets final deadline for HSRP coverage

GANGTOK, 15 April: The Supreme Court of India has directed that all states fully implement the scheme of fixing High Security Registration Plates (HSRP) by 30 April, 2012. The State government here is also comply with this order. Earlier, the State government had submitted to the apex court that the HSRP scheme would be completed by 31 March and had also been reported by this paper. However, all vehicles in the state could not be covered and the therefore the time limit has been extended by the Supreme Court.
“All states, therefore, are mandated to fully implement the scheme of fixation of HSRP in their entire state, positively by 30th April, 2012, in relation to new vehicles and 15th June, 2012 for old vehicles,” the Supreme Court order directs.
While extending the time limit, the apex court has made clear that no further extension shall be allowed and added that the directions of the Supreme Court are to be implemented without default. The apex court further ruled that in the event of default, the concerned Secretary (Transport) /Commissioner, State Transport Authority and/or any other person or authority responsible for such default “shall be liable to be proceeded against under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
The cost of fixing HSRPs in Sikkim, as has often been complained by vehicle owners, is much higher compared to other states. Here, it costs a little over Rs. 2,000 [for 4-wheelers] while in other states the cost is less than half this amount. In this context, it may also be highlighted here that the Supreme Court, had in 2010, dismissed appeals by foreign multinational backed Indian firms - Shmnit Utsch India Private Ltd and Tonnjes Eastern Security Technologies Pvt Ltd (the firm which bagged the contract in Sikkim as well)- claiming that state governments had no right to change the conditions laid down in the Central law proposed notice inviting tenders for HSRPs. Indian HSRP manufacturers had protested against the experience and certain minimum turnover clauses attached to the NITs and alleged that this was tailor-made for foreign multinationals to bag the contracts for supply of HSRPs.
West Bengal and Orissa had effected changes in the NITs, doing away with the clause requiring previous experience in manufacturing of HSRPs to qualify for submitting tenders. The changes were challenged unsuccessfully by Shhimnit and Tonnjes in the Calcutta and Orissa High Courts respectively. Both had moved the apex court against the decisions of the High Courts, and lost there as well.