In a significant development, the Meghalaya High Court has directed the state government to respond to allegations raised in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the operation and management of weighbridges across the state. The PIL, filed by social activist Tennydard M. Marak, highlights issues such as the absence of required weighbridges, illegal activities by government officials, and the facilitation of overloaded goods vehicles passing through weighment areas without proper checks. These practices have allegedly resulted in a substantial revenue loss estimated at ₹640 crores.
Background of the Case
The PIL brought to light several concerns regarding the weighbridge system in Meghalaya. The petitioner alleged that many areas lacked the necessary weighbridges, and where they existed, the facilities were inadequate. In some instances, weighments were conducted manually and inaccurately, leading to discrepancies in recorded weights. Additionally, it was claimed that goods vehicles, particularly those entering from neighboring countries like Bhutan and Bangladesh, were allowed to pass without proper weighment, circumventing the established protocols.
One notable example cited was the Dalu weighbridge located at Chaipani, which reportedly could only accommodate 10-wheeler trucks, while vehicles entering from Bhutan were typically 12-wheelers, rendering the weighbridge ineffective for these larger vehicles.
Court's Intervention and Directives
The division bench comprising Chief Justice I.P. Mukerji and Justice W. Diengdoh took cognizance of the allegations and directed the state government to file a counter affidavit addressing the issues raised. The court emphasized the importance of scrutinizing the petitioner's response and taking appropriate actions if the allegations were found to be true.
The state government had previously submitted a report stating that inspections had been conducted at 24 weighbridges, and no instances of overloaded trucks passing unchecked were found. However, the petitioner contested this report, challenging its findings and presenting evidence to the contrary.
In light of the serious nature of the allegations and the potential revenue implications, the court has mandated that the Principal Secretary of the Transport Department thoroughly examine the petitioner's response and file a detailed counter affidavit by July 5, 2025. This affidavit should address each of the points raised by the petitioner and outline the steps the government intends to take to rectify any identified issues.
Implications of the Court's Order
The court's directive underscores the gravity of the situation and the need for immediate and comprehensive action. If the allegations are substantiated, the state could face significant financial repercussions due to the loss of revenue from overloading fees, cess, fines, and royalties on export materials.
Furthermore, the court's intervention highlights the role of the judiciary in ensuring accountability and transparency in government operations. By directing the state to address the concerns raised in the PIL, the court is reinforcing the principle that public resources must be managed efficiently and in accordance with the law.
Conclusion
The Meghalaya High Court's order serves as a crucial step towards addressing the systemic issues plaguing the state's weighbridge system. It compels the government to take a hard look at its operations and implement necessary reforms to prevent further revenue loss and ensure the proper functioning of weighbridges. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for similar issues in other states, emphasizing the need for robust infrastructure and stringent enforcement to combat malpractices and safeguard public resources.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.