High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Present: Shri Raj Paul Kansal vs Nanakpura on 5 December, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Present: Shri Raj Paul Kansal vs Nanakpura on 5 December, 2008
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
                  ***

CWP NO. 2961 of 2008.

***

Bhagwant Rai Kansal Versus State of Punjab and others.

***

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur, CJ and
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh.

***

Present: Shri Raj Paul Kansal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.

Shri Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate, for MC,
Ludhiana.

Shri Amol Rattan Singh, Addl: A.G. with
Ms. Sonu Chahal, DAG, Punjab.

***

TS.Thakur, CJ (Oral)

This petition filed in public interest makes a grievance

regarding the poor condition of a public park situate in Ward No. 30, Guru

Nanakpura, Civil Lines, Ludhiana. The petitioner’s case appears to be that

on account of neglect and apathy on the part of the respondents who are

charged with the duties of maintaining the said park, the same has been

converted into an open air urinal.

In response to a notice issued by this Court, Mr. J.S. Bilga,

Executive Engineer (Horticulture) Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana has filed

a reply, from a reading whereof it appears that appropriate steps have

been taken by the authorities to protect the park against encroachment

and also a cement concrete pedestrian path has been constructed for the

benefit and convenience of the morning and evening walkers. A regular

employee/ Mali has also been engaged for maintenance of the plantation

and greenery of the park. The area supervisor and Junior Engineer of

Horticulture Wing have been detailed to visit the park to check the

attendance of the Mali/ Beldar to take immediate measures whenever any

-2- CWP No. 2961 of 2008

deficiency is noticed. The affidavit goes on to state that since the park is

situate in a residential area, the movement of visitors in the park is open to

public view. There is, therefore, no question of using the park as a place of

urination by the general public as alleged.

From the photographs produced along with the writ petition as

Annexures P-1 and P-2, it was evident that a corner of the park was

indeed being used by the public for urination. In order to explain that aspect

Mr. Bilga has filed an additional affidavit in which apart from the averments

made earlier, he has referred to a proposal to move the higher authorities

for constructing a standing urinal for the convenience of the residents of the

nearby area and visitors to the park. In the circumstances, therefore, all

that we need say is that the authorities shall take care to maintain and up-

keep the park and prevent the mis-use thereof in any way. The authorities

would also do well to process the proposal for constructing a standing

urinal, as suggested by the Executive Engineer. With the above

observation, this writ petition is disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their

own costs.

(T.S.Thakur)
Chief Justice

(Jasbir Singh)
Judge
December 05, 2008
Malik