IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11506 OF 2008(O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: November 20, 2008.
Arvind Thakur
..PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. Arvind Kashyap,
Advocate, for the petitioner
Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Addl. A.G., Haryana,
for respondent No. 1.
Mr. R.S.Longia, Advocate, for Mr. Arun Walia,
Advocate, for respondent No. 2.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
T.S.THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE (oral)
JUDGMENT
CM No. 22708 of 2008:
Written-statement on behalf of respondent No. 2 is taken on
record. Application stands disposed of.
CWP No. 11506 of 2008:
This petition filed in public interest prays for a direction against
the respondents to take steps to prevent occurrence of mishaps at work sites
where pits are dug and also to cover manholes, wherever drains
run through public places.
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11506 OF 2008 -2-
When this petition came up for hearing before this Court on
August 4, 2008, respondent No. 2 was directed to place on record the
policy, if any, finalised by the Haryana Urban Development Authority for
protection of humans living in the vicinity of drainages and manholes and
around places where excavation has been or is proposed to be carried out
by the respondents. The respondent has pursuant to the said order filed a
counter affidavit and placed on record a circular dated August 14, 2008,
issued to all the Superintending Engineers, HUDA, by the Chief Engineer,
HUDA, setting out the guidelines that require the contractors to take proper
precautions while laying underground sewerage/draining lines in places
where HUDA has allotted civil works. From a reading of the said
guidelines, we are of the view that HUDA is sensed to the need for
preventing accidents on account of carelessness of the contractors,
employed by it and that the necessary instructions have been issued to the
engineering staff to ensure that the guidelines formulated by HUDA are
strictly adhered to by the contractors. In the circumstances, therefore, and in
the light of the said guidelines, we see no room for issuing any further
directions from this Court except that in the event of any mishap taking
place on account of any act of negligence on the part of HUDA or its
contractors, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to seek redress in
appropriate proceedings before the competent Court. The writ petition is
disposed of with the above directions leaving the parties to bear them at
costs.
( T.S.THAKUR)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(JASBIR SINGH)
November 20, 2008. JUDGE
DKC