National Road Safety Board Rules, 2025 — Progress or Missed Opportunity?
The
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) has notified the National
Road Safety Board (NRSB) Rules, 2025, under Section 215D of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988. The notification renews attention to India’s
long-standing goal of establishing a permanent institutional framework for road
safety.
But
a key question remains: Do these Rules fulfil the Act’s vision — or merely
expand an administrative structure without real autonomy or impact?
The Act’s Vision — An Independent
Expert Body
Section
215D of the Motor Vehicles Act, inserted through the 2019 amendment, provides
for a National Road Safety Board to advise both Central and State
Governments on road safety, traffic management, and vehicle standards.
The
intent was clear — to create a technical, expert-led, and independent
advisory institution, capable of guiding government policy through
scientific evidence and professional insight rather than bureaucratic routine.
Rules — From 2021 to 2025: What’s
Changed
The
first NRSB Rules were notified on 3 September 2021 (GSR 615(E)
and SO 3627(E)) to give effect to Section 215D. They created a minimal
administrative structure, enough to legally constitute the Board but too weak
to make it operationally effective.
The
2025 Rules, newly notified, attempt to build on that foundation — adding
more procedural and functional detail. Yet, the essential question is: Do they
strengthen or soften the Board’s independence?
|
Aspect |
2021 Rules (GSR 615E) |
2025 Rules (New Notification) |
Implications |
|
Composition |
Chairperson + up to 7 members,
mostly government officials. |
Expanded categories —
administration, road engineering, trauma care, enforcement, public health,
etc. |
Broader representation, but still
dominated by officials. |
|
Appointment Process |
Nominated by Central Government. |
May introduce a
search-cum-selection process. |
Potentially improves transparency. |
|
Functions |
Advisory role on safety standards,
training, and research. |
Expanded to include accident data
analysis, state coordination, and awareness campaigns. |
Strengthens scope and operational
clarity. |
|
Secretariat |
Under MoRTH. |
Still under MoRTH. |
Functional dependence continues. |
|
Accountability |
Annual report to MoRTH. |
Broader reporting and evaluation
provisions. |
Improved transparency but limited
enforcement power. |
๐ข
Verdict:
The 2025 Rules are a modest improvement — they add detail, widen the
scope, and formalise accountability.
๐ด But the Board still lacks institutional autonomy and
independent composition, the core principles Parliament envisioned.
๐ง Rules vs. Act — Legal Clarity
It’s
important to clarify a frequent misconception:
Rules
need not mirror the Act; they are meant to implement it.
Under
delegated legislation, Rules provide the mechanism to operationalise the
Act. Courts intervene only when Rules contradict or defeat the
Act’s purpose.
As
the Supreme Court held in St. Johns Teachers Training Institute v. Regional
Director (2003) 3 SCC 321, subordinate legislation may “fill in the details
but cannot override or alter the essential features” of the statute.
Hence,
the issue with the 2025 Rules is not that they differ from the Act — but that
they may dilute the Act’s spirit by making the Board administratively
dependent on the same Ministry it must advise.
⚠️ Policy Concern — Bureaucratic Control, Limited Expertise
The
2025 framework still places the Board under MoRTH, both financially and
administratively.
While expert categories have increased, the balance of representation
remains skewed.
Without
genuine independence, the Board risks becoming a procedural body rather
than a policy think tank. Its recommendations could remain symbolic, not
strategic.
๐งญ What Road Safety Groups Can Do
The
Rules are only the beginning — their effectiveness depends on how civil
society, professionals, and citizen groups engage with them.
1. Advocate for Expert Inclusion
Demand
at least 50% representation of professionals from transport engineering,
trauma care, public health, behavioural science, and consumer safety.
2. Seek Transparency
Use
RTI and policy petitions to obtain Board minutes, reports, and
decisions. Push for public disclosure of recommendations and action
taken.
3. Collaborate, Don’t Confront
Build
alliances with policymakers and research institutions to provide technical
input on crash data analysis, post-crash response, and driver training
standards.
4. Monitor and Report
Publish
“People’s Reports on Road Safety Governance”, evaluating the Board’s
performance against the National Road Safety Policy (2010) and UN’s Decade of
Action (2021–2030).
๐ The Way Forward
The
National Road Safety Board Rules, 2025 mark progress but not
transformation.
They correct some structural gaps from 2021 but stop short of creating a truly independent
and expert-driven institution as envisaged by Section 215D.
India
loses over 1.5 lakh lives annually in road crashes. A board that merely
advises without autonomy cannot deliver systemic change.
To honour Parliament’s vision, the NRSB must evolve from a bureaucratic
committee into a national authority on road safety governance —
transparent, accountable, and science-led.
๐ข Follow the Public Right Action Network (PRAN)
๐ข
If you care about consumer rights, justice, and public accountability — stay
connected.
๐ฉ Subscribe for updates on law, policy, and people’s rights: https://publicrightaction.blogspot.com
๐ Follow us for more analyses on governance, accountability,
and public safety reforms.

.jpeg)


