1 govt bus for every 478 private vehicles: Was Sikkim's odd-even policy justified?

PANKAJ DHUNGEL

GANGTOK,: The odd-even vehicle restrictions implemented by the Sikkim government from May 18 to 31 during the recent fuel supply crisis primarily affected 55,967 registered private four-wheelers across the State. Introduced as an emergency measure to conserve fuel amid concerns over supply disruptions, the policy restricted the movement of thousands of private vehicles while permitting public transport and commercial passenger vehicles to continue operations.

However, official transport records, tourism movement data and observations made by the High Court of Sikkim have brought renewed attention to a key question: did the State possess sufficient public transport capacity to justify imposing restrictions on such a large number of private vehicles?

The matter is currently being examined by the High Court of Sikkim in a Public Interest Litigation challenging the odd-even policy. In its order dated May 29, the court directed the State government to disclose the measures taken to ensure mobility for the public after the restrictions were imposed.

“It is appropriate that the learned Additional Advocate General shall place before this Court on record the measures taken by the State Government for public transport to enable free movement of the public,” the court observed.

The matter was subsequently heard on June 9 and has now been listed for further hearing on July 30.

The court's observation has shifted attention from the fuel crisis itself to the availability and adequacy of alternative transport arrangements made available to the public during the restriction period.

Official data now available offers perhaps the clearest picture yet of the transport ecosystem that functioned during those two weeks.

According to Transport department records as of February 28, 2026, Sikkim had a total of 1,39,876 registered vehicles. Of these, 55,967 were private four-wheelers, the category directly affected by the odd-even restrictions. Government-owned vehicles numbered 5,351, including 4,935 four-wheelers and 416 two-wheelers.

While the restrictions targeted private cars, the government's position was that sufficient alternative transport options remained available to the public through buses, taxis and other commercial passenger vehicles.

The numbers show that Sikkim had a substantial commercial transport fleet. Registration records indicate the presence of 15,367 taxis, 6,514 maxi cabs operating as contract carriage vehicles and 3,005 luxury tourist vehicles. Together, these categories accounted for 24,886 commercial passenger vehicles across the State.

Separate operational figures released during the fuel crisis showed that 15,548 taxis and 6,474 maxi cabs were available for service. While these figures differ slightly from registration records, they reinforce the broader conclusion that more than 22,000 commercial passenger vehicles remained available during the implementation of the odd-even system.

The debate becomes more significant when these figures are compared with the government's own public transport fleet.

The State has confirmed that Sikkim Nationalised Transport (SNT) currently operates 107 buses for public transport services. During the fuel crisis, the government supplemented these services with eight City Runner buses operating in Gangtok and introduced two Pink City Runner buses dedicated to women commuters on May 27.

Taken together, the government's operational public transport fleet during the restriction period consisted of 117 buses.

The disparity between government-operated transport and commercial passenger transport is striking.

Against 117 government buses stood 24,886 registered taxis, maxi cabs and luxury tourist vehicles. In effect, commercial passenger vehicles outnumbered government-operated buses by more than 212 to one.

This indicates that mobility during the restriction period depended far more on commercial operators than on government-run transport services.

Another revealing comparison emerges when the number of affected private vehicles is measured against the government's bus fleet.

With 55,967 private four-wheelers covered by the odd-even restrictions and only 117 government buses available for public transport, there was effectively one government-operated bus for every 478 private cars in the State.

The figure does not imply that each bus was intended to replace 478 vehicles. However, it illustrates the scale of the challenge faced by the public transport system if residents were required to shift away from private vehicle use during the restriction period.

Even if all 117 buses operated at maximum capacity and frequency, the government-run public transport network alone could not have served as a direct substitute for the volume of private vehicles affected by the policy.

The picture changes when commercial transport vehicles are included in the equation.

Combining taxis, maxi cabs, luxury tourist vehicles and government-operated buses yields a passenger transport fleet of roughly 25,000 vehicles. Under that broader calculation, there was approximately one passenger transport vehicle available for every two private four-wheelers affected by the restrictions.

Yet this distinction lies at the heart of the debate currently before the High Court.

Government-operated public transport and privately operated commercial transport are not necessarily interchangeable. Buses operate on fixed routes and schedules and are generally designed to provide affordable mobility to large sections of the population. Taxis, maxi cabs and tourist vehicles, by contrast, operate on a fare-paying basis and depend on route demand and commercial viability.

While commercial operators undoubtedly provided mobility during the fuel crisis, questions remain over whether they constituted an adequate substitute for public transport, particularly in rural and remote areas.

Tourism movement data from the same period adds another layer to the discussion.

Official permit records show that 21,083 tourist vehicles crossed the 3rd Mile check post towards Nathu La and adjoining tourist destinations between May 18 and May 29. This translates into an average of nearly 1,757 tourist vehicle movements per day during the period when odd-even restrictions were being enforced.

The scale of tourism activity is notable.

The 21,083 tourist vehicle movements recorded over twelve days were almost equivalent to the combined state-wide fleet of taxis and maxi cabs. The figures demonstrate that vehicle movement remained substantial despite the restrictions and indicate that tourism-related transport activity continued at a high level throughout the fuel crisis.

The data also suggests that maintaining tourism mobility may have been a significant consideration in the government's approach. Tourism is among Sikkim's most important economic sectors and supports thousands of livelihoods across transport, hospitality and related industries. Restricting commercial tourism vehicles would likely have had far-reaching economic consequences.

District-wise registration data further highlights disparities in transport availability across the State.

Gangtok district accounted for 91,572 registered vehicles, representing more than 65 per cent of the State's vehicle population. The district also contained 12,350 taxis, 3,650 maxi cabs, 1,885 luxury tourist vehicles and 643 registered buses.

In contrast, Mangan district had only 421 taxis, 602 maxi cabs, 198 luxury tourist vehicles and 14 buses. Similar disparities exist between urban and rural areas, raising questions about whether residents across all districts had equal access to transport alternatives during the restriction period.

Supporters of the odd-even policy argue that it was a temporary emergency measure introduced to conserve fuel supplies and prevent panic buying at a time of uncertainty. The restrictions were subsequently withdrawn after the government announced that adequate buffer stocks of petrol and diesel had been secured.

Nevertheless, the data now available provides valuable insight into how mobility was maintained during the crisis.

The figures show that while more than 55,000 private four-wheelers were subjected to movement restrictions, the burden of sustaining passenger movement fell overwhelmingly on commercial transport operators. The government's own public transport fleet consisted of just 117 buses, while more than 24,000 taxis, maxi cabs and tourist vehicles formed the backbone of mobility across the state.

As the High Court prepares to hear the matter again on July 30, the numbers provide important context to the questions raised in court. The central issue is no longer merely whether transport alternatives existed, but whether a transport network overwhelmingly dependent on private commercial operators constituted an adequate alternative when restrictions were imposed on 55,967 private four-wheelers. The answer may ultimately influence how future emergency transport measures are assessed in Sikkim and whether public transport capacity becomes a more significant factor before similar restrictions are introduced again.