KAILASH KUMAR AGARWALA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a practicing Chartered Accountant in Guwahati. In the present Public Interest Litigation, he has essentially prayed that Respondent No.2 -Union of India and Respondent No.3 ­ The Automotive Research Association of India, be directed to subject all four wheeler motor vehicles coming under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 to undergo the compliance under Rule 126A of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. Rules 126 and 126A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, read as under : -

(2.) From the reading of above quoted Rules, it is clear that every manufacturer or importer of motor vehicle is required to submit the prototype of the vehicle for test by one of the vehicle testing agencies referred to in Rule 126. Also such testing agencies are required to conduct tests on vehicles drawn from the production line of the manufacturer to verify whether these vehicles conform to the provisions of rules made under section 110 of the Act.

(3.) Admittedly, there is no manufacturer or importer of motor vehicles in the State of Assam. Likewise, there is also not one testing agency referred to in Rule 126 in the State of Assam. Even the offices of Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.3 are located in Delhi and Pune, respectively. We, therefore, fail to understand why the petitioner has filed the petition here in Assam. We do not consider the present case as a genuine public interest litigation.