JUDGMENT Dipankar Datta, J. The pleaded case in the writ petition reveals this. While the petitioner was returning with his wife on 8th November, 2015 to his residence at village Dakshin Belegachhi within Baruipur Police Station from Gopalpur within Sonarpur Police Station, his wife met a road accident. A three-wheeled engine van/motor van driven by an errant and reckless driver, hit the petitioner's wife resulting in her sustaining grievous injury. Since the petitioner's wife required immediate medical care and assistance, he rushed her to a nearby orthopaedic surgeon who prescribed a surgical operation. The petitioner thereafter ran from one Government hospital to the other, but failed to admit his wife owing to dearth of beds. Finding no other alternative, the petitioner obtained a loan returnable with high rate of interest from a private money lender and admitted his wife in a private nursing home on 12th November, 2015. The surgical operation was conducted on 13th November, 2015 where after the petitioner's wife was discharged on 16th November, 2015. Presently the petitioner's wife is completely bed-ridden and there is little possibility of her full recovery and restoration of normal health condition. On and from 20th November, 2015, the petitioner approached various authorities of the civil administration as well as the police administration seeking justice i.e. for banning and/or restricting plying of three-wheeled engine vans/motor vans (hereafter motorised vans) together with monetary compensation from the State. 2. All such representations not having been looked into by the civil and the police administration, the petitioner has presented this writ petition claiming, inter alia, the following relief : "(a) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do commanding the respondent authorities, each one of them, their men, agents, servants, subordinates and/or assigns to forthwith show cause as to why the petitioner's representations have not been rendered any kinds of importance and why any kinds of proceedings still not initiated against the illegal plying of Engine/Motor Van; (b) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do commanding the respondent authorities, each one of them, their men, agents, servants, subordinates and/or assigns to consider the representations of the petitioner and direct the respondent authorities to take effective and fruitful steps to make complete restrictions and blanket banning of illegal plying of engine/motor Van;" 3. In paragraph 2 of the writ petition the petitioner has specifically pleaded as follows : "2. In paragraph 2 of the writ petition the petitioner has specifically pleaded as follows : "2. That your petitioner state that three-wheeled engine van/motor van is a living nightmare to the general citizens firstly because it does not have any effective brakes which can control the vehicle immediately, secondly it does not have any horns which can alert the public, thirdly if it metes with an accident general people will not get the advantage of "third party insurance claim" as neither it has registration number nor it has the requisite permission from Regional Transport Authority, fourthly it emits noxious carbon-dioxide and carbon-monoxide which alarmingly increase the pollution level of environment as it does not any pollution clearance/fit certificate and last but not the least it has been regularly plying carrying passengers as night without any provision of light and the entire scenario is more or less effective for West Bengal." 4. This Bench had taken judicial notice of illegal plying of motorised vans on public roads in the district of Murshidabad as transport vehicles in clear subversion of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereafter the Act), without the same being registered and without obtaining permit in terms of sections 39 and 66 thereof respectively, while hearing W.P. 18204(W) of 2006 [Sri Nirendra Nath Biswas v. State of West Bengal & ors.]. In an order dated September 21, 2006, reference was made to the order dated October 11, 2004 passed by an Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court [cor. Hon'ble D.K. Seth and Hon'ble R.N. Sinha, JJ. (as Their Lordships then were)] while disposing of an application for stay in connection with M.A.T. No.3397 of 2004. The operative part of the said order reads as follows: "The definition under Section 2(28) of the Motor Vehicles Act would include this kind of mechanically propelled vehicle even if the machine is attached to a van rickshaw. Therefore, the Department shall frame appropriate Rules and take appropriate steps for laying down procedure and provisions for registering such vehicles and if necessary for issuing permits with all other consequential formalities or may prohibit use of such vehicle, as the case may be. Therefore, the Department shall frame appropriate Rules and take appropriate steps for laying down procedure and provisions for registering such vehicles and if necessary for issuing permits with all other consequential formalities or may prohibit use of such vehicle, as the case may be. In the meantime if the appellants in this appeal, approach the appropriate authorities, namely the Registering Authorities, under the Motor Vehicles Act, in that event, such Authority of the … illegible … shall take appropriate steps by issuing temporary authorisation for plying these vehicles for carrying goods without carrying any passenger under the existing Rules meant for autorickshaws for the time being, subject to framing of appropriate Rules and taking appropriate decision in the matter. It may also levy appropriate fees, as may be deemed necessary, for such purposes. The Principal secretary, Transport shall issue appropriate directions within a fortnight from the date of communication of this order and shall also take steps for formulating appropriate policy and rules in this regard as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of such communication. In case such vehicles are registered with the local Panchayat and in case those are now plied on the road or street in that event, the police shall not seize such vehicles for a period of eight weeks." 5. This Bench recorded the submission advanced on behalf of the respondents that the State Government had not yet given effect to the directions contained in the order dated October 11, 2004 of the Hon'ble Division Bench and, accordingly, proceeded to issue directions as follows: "Having regard to the submissions made at the bar and particularly in view of the seriousness of the issue involved herein, it is directed that the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad shall take effective steps for ensuring that three-wheeled cycle vans fitted with diesel motor engines are not operated for carrying passengers within the district of Murshidabad, without having any valid registration and permit as required by the Act. For this purpose, the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad shall issue instructions to all Officers-in-Charge of Police Stations under his jurisdiction to give effect to this order. For the present and till further order is passed, such three-wheeled cycle vans fitted with diesel engines (without registration and permit as required by the Act) shall, however, be allowed to transport goods only. For this purpose, the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad shall issue instructions to all Officers-in-Charge of Police Stations under his jurisdiction to give effect to this order. For the present and till further order is passed, such three-wheeled cycle vans fitted with diesel engines (without registration and permit as required by the Act) shall, however, be allowed to transport goods only. Motor Vehicles Inspectors attached to the offices of the Regional Transport Authority, Murshidabad are also directed to ensure that such three-wheeled cycle vans fitted with diesel engines (not having valid registration and not having valid permits in terms of the Act) are not operated for the purpose of transporting passengers. If at any point of time it is found that such three-wheeled cycle vans fitted with diesel engines are operating for transporting passengers without complying with the provisions of the Act, the police authorities as well as the Motor Vehicle Inspectors shall be at liberty to seize such vehicles. This interim order is passed keeping in mind the interest of the general public of the district of Murshidabad, for, in the event any one of them meets with an accident being boarded on such three-wheeled cycle van such vehicles. This interim order is passed keeping in mind the interest of the general public of the district of Murshidabad, for, in the event any one of them meets with an accident being boarded on such three-wheeled cycle van fitted with diesel engine without having any valid registration or valid permit and while it is in operation on a public road, he cannot be suitably compensated as provided in the Act." (bold font in original) 6. On January 5, 2007, this Bench had directed as follows: "For the present, having regard to the fact that the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 11.10.2004 in M.A.T. 3397 of 2004 had passed a direction on the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport 'to issue appropriate directions within a fortnight from the date of communication of this order and shall also take steps for formulating appropriate policy and rules' in regard to plying of these vehicles, and as has been submitted that no such policy, as directed, has yet been framed, this Court considers it necessary to direct that Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Government of West Bengal to file a report before this Court within two weeks from date stating therein the steps taken by the Government and the policy formulated by it in compliance with the order dated 11.10.2004 referred to above." (words in italics in original) 7. An undated report was filed by Mr. Sumantra Choudhury, Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal, Transport Department, in compliance with the aforesaid order, the concluding portion whereof reads as follows: "As such, the Registering Authority or the permit issuing authority of this Government cannot allow such uncertified cycle vans/rickshaws fitted with motor to ply as a motor vehicle. Such plying of diesel engine fitted rickshaw vans/cycle vans, being unauthorized and illegal, the Transport Department has already moved the Home Department for taking steps to regulate the plying of such cycle vans, the same being a public danger, vide U.O. No. TS-318/04 dated 12.8.04. In this regard it is submitted that plying of such type of van rickshaws with motors having engine capacity of more than 25 CC is illegal and totally unauthorized. Police authorities have been empowered under the statutes to take actions for stopping plying of such illegal motorised van rickshaws. The policy of the Transport Department in the matter is clear as would be evident from the foregoing. It has been made abundantly clear that plying of such motorised van rickshaw is contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Acts and Central Motor Vehicles Rules framed thereunder as because the design etc. of the vehicle is not approved by ARAI, Pune or such other Central Agency and this will be a gross violation of Safety Standards/pollution norms. The State Government is authorised by law to take actions in this regard as per law. of the vehicle is not approved by ARAI, Pune or such other Central Agency and this will be a gross violation of Safety Standards/pollution norms. The State Government is authorised by law to take actions in this regard as per law. As the Hon'ble Division Bench has not yet disposed of the aforesaid Appeal Case being M.A.T. No. 3397 of 2004, final decision in the matter is awaited. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to consider the same." (underlining for emphasis) 8. U.O. No.TS-318/04 dated August 12, 2004 referred to in the above extract, signed by Mr. Sumantra Choudhury, reads as follows: "Principal Secretary, Home Department, may kindly recall his endorsement dated 7-8-2004 on the body of the letter addressed to him dated 3-8-2004 from one Dr. Sumanta Hira of Kolkata – 700 014. I enclose a xerox copy of the relevant extract containing definition of Motor Vehicle strictly as per M.V. Act, 1988. These rickshaw vans, plying in rural areas, fitted with small portable motor engines, are highly unscientific from safety point of view. They have literally become a standing nuisance. RTA members of different districts have lodged complaints against these categories of rickshaw vans operated by motor engines. There are some categories of motor vans, where motor cycle engines are fitted, and those may be brought under the definition of motor vehicle. If the capacity of the engine is less than 25 cc, these cannot be called motor vehicles. If the capacity of the engine is more than 25 cc, these come under the category of motor vehicle and, in that case, they will have to conform to the standards as approved under C.M.V. Rules, 1989. In any case, the reality is that, such rickshaw vans fitted with improvised motor engines are plying extensively in rural areas and have become very popular. The State Government will have to take a view." (bold font in original) 9. In course of hearing of such writ petition, this Bench was also apprised of a meeting having been held in the chamber of the Chief Secretary, Govt. of West Bengal on July 4, 2007 for formulating a policy to regulate plying of motorised vans. Being called upon, the proceedings of such meeting were included in an affidavit of Sri Basudev Das, Assistant Secretary, Government of West Bengal, Home Department, dated August 10, 2007. It is discerned therefrom that: "Members present: 1. of West Bengal on July 4, 2007 for formulating a policy to regulate plying of motorised vans. Being called upon, the proceedings of such meeting were included in an affidavit of Sri Basudev Das, Assistant Secretary, Government of West Bengal, Home Department, dated August 10, 2007. It is discerned therefrom that: "Members present: 1. Shri A. K. Deb, IAS, Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal. 2. Shri P. Roy, IAS, Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Home department. 3. Shri Sumantra Choudhury, IAS, Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Transport department. 4. Shri A. Vohra, IPS, Director General of Police, West Bengal. 5. Shri M. N. Roy, IAS, Principal Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Panchayat & Rural Development Department. 6. Shri U. K. Dutta, IPS, Additional Director General of Police (Traffic), West Bengal. 10. After detailed discussions, following decisions were taken: 1. It was observed that a large number of rickshaw vans fitted with diesel/petrol engines of different capacities are plying extensively in rural/semi-urban areas in the State. If the capacity of the engine is less than 25 cc, these cannot be called 'motor vehicle' as defined in M.V. Act. If, however, the capacity of the engine is more than 25 cc, these come under the category of 'motor vehicle' and in that case, they will have to conform to the standards as approved under Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. As per Section 41(4) of the M.V. Act, 1988, read with Rule 92 of the C.M.V. Rules, 1989, no such motor vehicle can ply on road without compliance of the provisions of the Chapter V of the C.M.V. Rules, 1989. The compliance of provisions include safety requirements as well as minimum pollution standards to be certified by an agency as provided in Rule 126 of the C.M.V. Rules. Such plying of diesel/petrol engine (of capacity more than 25 cc) fitted rickshaw vans are blatantly illegal and in gross violation of the Motor Vehicle Act and Rules made thereunder. 2. As regards, rickshaw vans etc. fitted with engines of capacity of less than 25 cc, Panchayat and Rural Development Department and Municipal Affairs Department were requested to include suitable provision in their respective Acts by bringing amendments for registration, permission to ply, payment of taxes etc. of these categories of vehicles. 3. As regards battery operated/solar powered bicycle, rickshaw vans etc. fitted with engines of capacity of less than 25 cc, Panchayat and Rural Development Department and Municipal Affairs Department were requested to include suitable provision in their respective Acts by bringing amendments for registration, permission to ply, payment of taxes etc. of these categories of vehicles. 3. As regards battery operated/solar powered bicycle, rickshaw vans etc. which do not come under the definition of 'motor vehicle' as per M.V. Act, similar provision be made in Panchayat and Municipal Act for their registration, operation and payment of taxes etc. 4. It was noted that rickshaw-vans fitted with engines are plying extensively not only in this State but also in a number of States in the country. M.V. Act is a Central Act and hence it will be advisable to have the views of the Central Government on the subject. A reference was earlier made to the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, seeking their opinion as to whether they would like to frame a policy at the national level in the matter. It was decided that, a further reference may be made by Chief Secretary addressed to Government of India asking for their comments on the subject. Till such time the views of Government of India are received, it is not possible for the State Government to frame policy guidelines except to take actions as indicated in the foregoing paragraphs." (underlining for emphasis) 11. Despite the decision arrived at in the meeting dated July 4, 2007, inter alia, to the effect that the Panchayat and Rural Development Department and Municipal Affairs Department would be requested to include suitable provision in their respective Acts by bringing amendments for registration, permission to ply, payment of taxes, etc. of motorised vans etc. fitted with engines of capacity of less than 25 cc, no positive action seems to have followed during the next 6 (six) years. On the contrary, what ensued were the statutory provisions and the concept of good governance based thereon being thrown to the winds. The Special Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Department of Panchayats and Rural Development proceeded to issue a memo dated November 28, 2013 addressed to the District Magistrate, Hooghly to the following effect: "I am directed to state that the matter of issuing of licenses to Motorized Rickshaw-Vans has been under active consideration of the State Government for quite some time. The Group of Ministers on Transport has recently recommended that the motorised rickshaw-vans running in the rural areas of West Bengal be brought under the regime of licenses for appropriate regulation in the interest of the passengers and members of public at large. Since the Hon'ble Chief Minister has approved the said recommendation of the Group of Ministers and Minister-in-Charge, Transport and Sports Department, Government of West Bengal has requested this Department to take necessary action in this respect, I am directed to convey the following direction of the State Government for granting license to the motorised rickshaw-vans plying within the Panchayat areas. 1. Licenses will be issued to all the motorised rickshaw vans operating in the rural areas. 2. An annual fee of Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred) only will be charged as license fee by the Panchayat bodies of the appropriate level. 3. The motor vans which will run within the area of a Gram Panchayat will be licensed by that Gram Panchayat. 4. The motor vans which will run from one Gram Panchayat to another but within the jurisdiction of a Panchayat Samiti will be licensed by the Panchayat Samiti concerned. 5. The motor vans which will run from one Panchayat Samiti to another will be licensed by the Zilla Parishad. 6. The Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti and Zilla Parishad will incorporate the same in their Byelaws." 12. Aggrieved by the said memo, certain stage carriage operators presented a writ petition. The same was heard by a coordinate Bench (cor. Hon'ble B. Somadder, J.). By judgment and order dated June 18, 2014 [since reported in 2014 (4) CHN (CAL) 504 : Ajit Kumar Khan & ors. v. State of West Bengal & ors.], His Lordship set aside the impugned memo on the ground that the State action was blatantly and palpably contrary to the statutory laws as applicable and granted liberty to the State to issue appropriate notification in accordance with law. 13. Has the situation changed even then? It is the utter misfortune of the people of the State that the Government of the day instead of acting according to law and arresting unauthorized plying of motorised vans has in effect encouraged the same leading to total subversion of the rule of law. 14. 13. Has the situation changed even then? It is the utter misfortune of the people of the State that the Government of the day instead of acting according to law and arresting unauthorized plying of motorised vans has in effect encouraged the same leading to total subversion of the rule of law. 14. That the mechanically propelled motorised vans fitted with petrol/diesel engines of 26 cc capacity or more answer the definition of "motor vehicle" in section 2(28) of the Act, is not in doubt. Continuous plying of such motorised vans predominantly in the rural areas of West Bengal and occasionally in the urban areas cannot escape the notice of anyone who has a penchant to travel by road. Not only do the motorised vans do not have registration and permit as required by the Act, the same are not insured, do not possess 'pollution under control' certificate under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, and do not also pay tax in terms of the provisions of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1979 and the West Bengal Additional Tax and One-Time Tax on Motor Vehicles Act, 1989. These are obviously the fallout and consequence of lack of serious endeavour on the part of the Government to restrict/regulate the plying of the motorised vans on public roads within West Bengal. A rather soft attitude of the Government has emboldened the motorised van owners to care less for the rule of law, thereby worsening the situation beyond imagination. 15. Such brazen violation of the provisions of the Act with impunity, could not have escaped judicial notice. Without limiting its scrutiny to the sufferings of the petitioner's wife, this Bench by an order dated March 29, 2016 directed the Principal Secretary, Transport Department to file a report dealing with the problem voiced in the writ petition and to indicate how his department proposes to tackle the problem of motorised vans plying on public roads without conforming to the provisions of the Act, not only in the district of South 24-Parganas but in the other districts of the State as well. 16. A report has since been filed by the principal secretary dated February 18, 2016. 16. A report has since been filed by the principal secretary dated February 18, 2016. Perusal thereof does not reveal that the officers of the transport department have made any effort worth the name to bring to the notice of the principal secretary the earlier proceedings before this Court and the judicial/executive decisions, or else this Bench is sure that the principal secretary would have adverted to the same. 17. Be that as it may, excerpts from the report of the principal secretary read as follows : "The problem of 'Motorised Vans' emanates from the basic problem of what is often referred to in public literature as the problem of 'last-mile connectivity'. …………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………. It appears that there is a market for these 'Motorised Vans'. Without any state support, without any loan or subsidy from any public financial institution or the Government, thousands of micro-entrepreneurs and transport workers have come to the market of supplying transportation services in particularly sub-urban and rural areas, and have been able to survive the vagaries of the market, apparently because the demands exist. Notwithstanding above, however, these inchoate market efforts to cater to the unattended demands do not warrant legal justification, unless the supply of services in this manner conforms to the laws/rules/norms that are authoritatively laid down. Admittedly, the 'Motorised Vans' do not generally conform to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rules made thereunder. The public authorities, therefore, have not been able to register these vans under the Motor Vehicles Act or to give appropriate permits for operation of the same. Environmental and general public difficulties emanating from rampant movements of these Vans have been noted, but the management of the issues has been primarily local. On the one hand, therefore, there is the fact of the increasing demand for last-mile connectivity and the fact of creation of micro-employments in the informal sector of transportation services. On the other hand, there is the fact of inadequate regulation, which has implications in the context of public life. On the one hand, therefore, there is the fact of the increasing demand for last-mile connectivity and the fact of creation of micro-employments in the informal sector of transportation services. On the other hand, there is the fact of inadequate regulation, which has implications in the context of public life. ………………………………………………………… It is submitted that the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta may kindly consider whether a suitable direction could be issued to the Government of India in the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to evolve some legal provisions and some guidelines in order to impose a similar regime of norms and rules on the 'Motor Vans' under examination, the Vans being (in effect) only one other species in the same genre of last-mile connectors. Meanwhile, local administration and the local bodies in the State may be directed to suitably apportion the routes, and regulate the movements related thereto, of the 'Motorised Vans' in the different areas of the State. The overriding principle may be that the 'Motorised Vans' should not run on major arterial roads (i.e. National Highways, State Highways, Major District Roads etc.) and should be allowed only to cater to the needs relating to last-mile connectivity." (underlining for emphasis) 18. Perusal of the aforesaid extract reveals the concern of the principal secretary touching upon the problem of "last-mile connectivity", perhaps forgetting for a moment that the rule of law is supreme in this country. 19. The observation that the motorised vans do not generally conform to the provisions of the Act and the rules framed thereunder and, therefore, the public authorities have not been able to register them under the Act or to give appropriate permits for operation of the same is intriguing. The transport department and the other departments being well and truly aware that apart from not complying with the requirements of the statute the design of the motorised vans are also not in sync with specifications found in the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, the only way out to abide by the rule of law was to ban the plying of the motorised vans in phases. This Bench is minded to say that there has been no real effort on the part of the Government to make the motorised van owners aware of the requirements of law and to insist that those motorised vans fitted with engines having capacity of 26 cc or more must of necessity be withdrawn. Having regard to the nature of activity for which these motorised vans are being put to use i.e. carrying of passengers and/or goods for hire or reward, these are also comprehended within the meaning of "transport vehicle" as defined in section 2(47) of the Act. To allow such motorised vans to ply on public roads on the specious ground of ensuring "connectivity" is in effect admission of the Government's failure to guarantee the citizens' right of free locomotion and is an argument which none, far less the Court, can buy. When the genuine will to adhere to the statute is lacking, it is impossible to expect results that are positive and beneficial for the society at large. 20. Irrespective of the local demand for such motorised vans and whatever be the nature of inconvenience that the people of particular localities might face should such motorised vans be withdrawn totally, the rule of law cannot be twisted/trampled upon to meet certain local needs. The concept of independence of the judiciary constitutes the foundation on which rests the edifice of our democratic polity. If there is one principle which runs through the entire fabric of our Constitution, it is the principle of the rule of law and under the Constitution, it is the judiciary which is entrusted with the task of keeping every organ of the State within the limits of the law and thereby making the rule of law meaningful and effective [see AIR 1982 SC 149 : S.P. Gupta v. Union of India]. The Act does not permit plying of "motor vehicles" on public roads without adherence to the statutory requirements. Reading of the last two paragraphs of the report of the principal secretary reveals abject surrender of the Government in failing to control illegal plying of motorised vans and seeking to shift the entire burden of regulating/restricting plying of motorised vans on the Court's shoulders, as if this is the first occasion for the Court to consider the issue. Reading of the last two paragraphs of the report of the principal secretary reveals abject surrender of the Government in failing to control illegal plying of motorised vans and seeking to shift the entire burden of regulating/restricting plying of motorised vans on the Court's shoulders, as if this is the first occasion for the Court to consider the issue. This Bench is left appalled that the department of transport seems to be unaware of the past proceedings before this Court concerning plying of motorised vans and the directions that were issued to bring about an orderly regime in relation thereto. There can hardly be two opinions, regard being had to the concept of separation of powers amongst the three organs of the State, that regulation of traffic is an issue which the civil and the police administration ought to decide how best it could be addressed and worked out. If a policy is required to be formulated, let it be formulated; if the policy requires regulated plying, let plying be regulated in terms of such policy; should the policy require total or partial banning, such banning must be given effect. The role of the Courts is not to don the hat of an administrator. It can judicially review the process of decision making and at best guide the administrators to take a proper decision or formulate policy bearing in mind the relevant statutory provisions but with the ultimate object of upholding the rule of law. However, allowing uncontrolled/unrestricted/unregulated plying of the motorised vans to appease the motorised van owners and their users, bearing in mind larger benefits that would accrue to a perceptible group of notorious people if such motorised vans were allowed to ply, would attract 'zero-tolerance' and can never go unnoticed. It would tantamount to abdication of the Court's duty if these brazen violations of statutory provisions are not checked at once, if necessary, by issuing continuous Mandamus. 21. Mr. Majumder, learned Government Pleader for the State had little to offer by way of clarification and left the matter of issuing appropriate directions to the discretion of the Bench. 22. Since the law enforcing agency of the State has been thoroughly remiss in the discharge of its statutory duties and the Government has invited the Bench to pull the trigger, this Bench has no other option open but to do so duly conscious of the ramifications. 22. Since the law enforcing agency of the State has been thoroughly remiss in the discharge of its statutory duties and the Government has invited the Bench to pull the trigger, this Bench has no other option open but to do so duly conscious of the ramifications. To remind the Government of its responsibilities and obligations, and to bring about orderliness in society, it is necessary to command all by a judicial fiat to follow the rule of law. 23. The grim situation in this State arising out of total noncompliance of orders passed by this Court on earlier occasions necessitates directing all the authorities of the State, be it the civil administration or the police administration, to ensure that with effect from May 15, 2016 motorised vans answering the definition of "motor vehicle" in the Act carrying goods/passengers do not ply on National Highways, State Highways, major district roads as well as roads on which stage carriage/contract carriage services are being offered in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In what manner the motorised van owners shall be made aware of this order for compliance therewith is left to the principal secretary to decide. Should such motorised vans be found to ply on the highways/roads referred to above despite its owners being made aware of this order, immediate seizure of the same shall be effected in accordance with section 207 of the Act. 24. It is only in the remote parts of the State where connectivity is a real problem because of dearth of public service vehicles or private carriers that these motorised vans may be allowed to ply to facilitate conveyance of goods/passengers, but not beyond August 16, 2016. 25. This order shall be furnished to all the Regional Transport Officers as well as Additional Regional Transport Officers of the State, the Inspectors/Officers-in-Charge of all police stations, the Superintendents of Police of all the districts and the Commissioners of Police of all Police Commissionerates, in the State of West Bengal for securing its due compliance. It is made clear that any breach of the same shall be viewed strictly. 26. This Bench has not considered it necessary to put the motorised van owners on notice because of the stand of the Government noted above and that no amount of audience to them could have brought about a change in the decision on merits. 27. It is made clear that any breach of the same shall be viewed strictly. 26. This Bench has not considered it necessary to put the motorised van owners on notice because of the stand of the Government noted above and that no amount of audience to them could have brought about a change in the decision on merits. 27. The writ petition shall be listed under the heading "For Orders" as 'Heard-in Part' on 23rd June, 2016. 28. If the petitioner's claim is to be believed that his wife suffered injury due to a road accident and if only the motor vehicle involved in such accident had registration, permit, insurance, etc. as required by the provisions of the Act, she could have applied before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction for compensation. Since the offending vehicle has no registration and permit and is also not insured, the petitioner or his wife is not in a position to avail the beneficent provisions of the Act. Subject to the following, it is the duty of the State to compensate the petitioner or his wife. 29. The principal secretary shall, before the returnable date of this writ petition, call upon the petitioner to furnish relevant documents to allow him examine as to whether his wife sustained injury arising out of a road accident or not involving a motorised van and if indeed the petitioner's claim is substantiated, the State must not leave any stone unturned to compensate the petitioner or his wife just as the State has introduced welfare measures to compensate the dependants of persons who have unfortunately died as a result of snake-bite/sun-stroke or owing to any other natural calamity. 30. The decision of the principal secretary in this regard must be placed before this Bench on the returnable date. 31. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order shall be made available to the applicant without unnecessary delay.