PAPER CLIPPING CONTAINING AN Vs. S.H.O.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition raises a very important point for consideration. It is a taken up case on the basis of paper reports dated 7.9.1999 containing a mutilated car on account of the blast of the liquid petroleum gas cylinder placed therein used as a fuel in place of petrol. If it is a solitary incident of a blast, it may be called as an accident. But, it is not so. At some other places, similar incidents have been reported. Apart from the safety point which has to be decided on factual side, the prime point is the legality or otherwise in the user of the gas cylinder as a fuel to run the automobile vehicles.

(2.) MR . B. Adinarayana Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government and Mr. Sarvabhouma Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the 9th respondent submit that Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is not applicable for the conversion of the liquid petroleum gas into a fuel source. According to the learned Counsel, while for substitution of other fuel sources in place of petrol/ diesel, application for conversion and permission for the same is necessary by the authority, for the conversion of liquid petroleum gas as a fuel source in place of petrol/diesel, no such necessity is contemplated by Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

(3.) THIS argument of the learned Advocate-General is diametrically opposite to that of the learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the 9th respondent. Mr. M.R.K. Choudhary, the learned Senior Counsel who also intervened in the proceedings, supported the argument of the learned Additional Advocate-General.