Gangtok, Aug 20: The proposed Sikkim AI Permit System has come under fresh scrutiny after the Citizen Action Party (CAP) questioned its fee structure, transparency, data control and possible private-sector involvement while demanding an investigation into alleged revenue leakage under the existing tourism permit mechanism.
Addressing a press conference, CAP said any major reform affecting Protected Area Permits and Restricted Area Permits must be introduced only after meaningful consultation with tour operators, taxi drivers, travel agencies, hoteliers and other residents whose livelihoods depend on tourism.
The controversy follows the Sikkim government’s August 18 stakeholder meeting at Manan Kendra, where Chief Minister Prem Singh Tamang chaired discussions on the proposed Integrated Online Permit System.
The government says the technology-driven platform is intended to simplify permit processing, reduce paperwork, create verifiable transaction records, prevent revenue leakage and improve oversight of tourist movement across regulated destinations. The proposal covers important routes, including Tsomgo–Nathula and the Lachen–Lachung circuits in North Sikkim.
CAP Questions Proposed Permit Charges
CAP claimed that tourists previously paid a ₹200 permit fee for Nathula, but the proposed structure would impose different charges according to vehicle categories and extend the fee regime to several destinations in North Sikkim.
Citing a rate structure presented during consultations, the party said vehicles below 1,000cc could be charged ₹1,500, larger vehicles ₹2,000, Tempo Travellers ₹3,000 and buses ₹5,000. It also referred to proposed charges of ₹500 for locally registered motorcycles and ₹1,000 for motorcycles registered outside Sikkim.
CAP warned that higher permit-related expenses could make Sikkim costlier for visitors and potentially affect tourist arrivals. It urged the government to consider the cumulative financial burden on travellers, including the existing ₹50 Sustainable Development Fee.
The opposition party said additional revenue should be accompanied by visible improvements in roads, public toilets, sanitation, emergency medical services and oxygen facilities along high-altitude routes.
The exact rates, exemptions and implementation conditions remain subject to official clarification because the government has said the proposal is still undergoing consultation.
Alleged Revenue Leakage Comes Under Spotlight
CAP also demanded an independent investigation into what it described as a serious gap between tourist arrivals and permit revenue collected under the existing system.
The party alleged that tourist numbers cited by the authorities should have generated approximately ₹31 crore, while the amount recorded by the department was substantially lower. CAP claimed the difference could represent an unaccounted revenue loss of approximately ₹27 crore.
The party said it had approached the State Vigilance authorities and demanded that responsibility be fixed if an investigation establishes that public revenue was lost, diverted or misappropriated.
The alleged loss has not been independently established. The figures require verification through audited government records, permit data, treasury receipts and the findings of any authorised investigation.
The state government has separately acknowledged concerns over revenue leakage. At the August 18 meeting, the Chief Minister said the proposed digital system was intended to strengthen revenue collection and ensure that tourism income benefited the public through development programmes.
CAP Seeks Clarity on Tender and Private Company
CAP further questioned the present status of the online permit project, citing what it described as conflicting information about whether the system remains a proposal or has advanced towards tendering and implementation.
The CAP party demanded disclosure of whether any tender had been issued, withdrawn, cancelled or reintroduced. It also sought publication of the eligibility conditions, selection process, financial model and identity of any company considered for the project.
CAP raised questions about the possible involvement of Beltek Artificial Intelligence Private Limited, referring to the company’s reported association with other technology projects in Sikkim.
The government previously has maintained that any agency engaged to develop or operate the platform would function only as a service provider. Ownership, authority, revenue control and oversight would remain with the Tourism and Civil Aviation Department, according to the official statement.
The proposed platform is also expected to incorporate digital payments, geo-fencing, non-transferable permits, transaction tracking, cancellation and refund facilities, secure data storage and contingency arrangements for internet or electricity disruptions.
Party Demands Public Access to Permit Data
CAP said it was not opposed to technology or the modernisation of Sikkim’s tourism administration. Its objection, the party maintained, was to introducing the system without sufficient disclosure, independent oversight and stakeholder representation.
The party demanded regular publication of permit and revenue data, including the number of permits issued, tourist and vehicle movements, registrations and renewals, fees collected, refunds and cancellations, agencies processing applications and the authority controlling tourist data.
CAP argued that an online platform alone would not guarantee accountability unless financial transactions and administrative decisions were open to public scrutiny.
The government’s proposal envisages permit applications being routed through registered Sikkim-based tour operators. Each authorised agency would receive individual credentials, allowing transactions to be traced to the operator processing them.
CAP Warns of Further Legal Action
CAP urged the government to investigate suspected irregularities under the existing system before imposing new charges. It said preventing leakage and modernising permit processing were legitimate objectives, but accountability for past collections should not be overlooked.
The party warned that it could approach central agencies, including the Central Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement Directorate, if the state government failed to address its allegations.
