Recently, the Supreme Court criticised the Centre for failing to implement a cashless treatment scheme for road accident victims, despite its statutory backing since April 2022, and summoned the MoRTH Secretary over the delay.
The issue arose during the hearing of an application concerning the implementation of a legislative scheme that provides for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the critical “golden hour”, the first hour after an accident, when timely medical intervention is most crucial. This scheme was enacted through amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act and had received Parliamentary approval in April 2022. Despite clear directions issued earlier by the Court, the scheme had not been operationalised by the government.
Appearing for the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Additional Solicitor General Vikramjeet Banerjee submitted that the Ministry was facing several administrative and procedural hurdles in framing the scheme as required under Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He sought to justify the delay on account of these bottlenecks.
However, the Court firmly rejected the explanation, stating that the continued delay had grave consequences. The Bench comprising Justice A.S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan noted, “People are losing lives because of your default. This is your own legislation and just because you are not able to implement it, several lives are getting lost as they cannot avail of cashless treatment.”
Further expressing its displeasure, the Court remarked that the deadline granted for framing the scheme had lapsed on March 14 and the government’s failure amounted to a serious breach. It stated, “This is a very serious breach of not only the order of this court but a failure to implement a beneficial provision of the statute.” Highlighting the importance of accountability, the Court added, “Our experience shows that unless the top government functionaries are summoned, things do not move.”
Taking a stern view, the Bench directed the Secretary of MoRTH to appear virtually before the Court on the next date of hearing to explain the delay in compliance.
Source Link
Picture Source :
