Aji v. The State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/29TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 17085 of 2013 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
------------- 1.
AJI S.R.M., SAJI NIVAS, VADASSERIKONAM P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
2.
P.K. VIDHYADHARAN, AMURTHAM, SREENIVASAPURAM P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.PREMCHAND SRI.V.TEKCHAND.
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3. THE SUPERINTNDEING ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS & BRIDGES), SOUTH CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4. THE DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, NEAR PMG, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOUSHAD THOTTATHIL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rvs.
WP(C).No. 17085 of 2013 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
------------------------ EXHIBIT-P1TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.
EXHIBIT-P2TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.
EXHIBIT-P3TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.
EXHIBIT-P4TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.
EXHIBIT-P5TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM WHICH APPEARED IN THE DESABHIMANI DAILY DATED 16/06/2013.
EXHIBIT-P6TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM WHICH APPEARED IN THE JANAYUGAM DAILY DATED 14/06/2013.
EXHIBIT-P7TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM WHICH APPEARED IN THRE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 14/06/2013.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
----------------------- EXHIBIT-R3(A - TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE EXISTING CONDITION OF RETAINING WALL.
/TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE RVS.
A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J --------------------------------------------- WPC No.17085 of 2013 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2015
JUDGMENT
The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is with regard to the condition of the retaining wall constructed just opposite to the Sivagiri Mutt and Pilgrimage Centre, Varkala.
2. The first petitioner is the convenor of Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Union (SNDP), Sivagiri Unit, Varkala. The second petitioner is the Chairman of the Varkala Development Council, an association formed for the development of Varkala Town and Sivagiri Pilgrimage Centre. Both of them are residents of Varkala. They point out that VarkalaSivagiri road starts from Varkala and goes up to Sivagiri Mutt and Pilgrimage Centre. According to them, every year, thousands of devotees from all over Kerala come to Sivagiri Mutt and Pilgrimage
WPC No.17085/2013 2 Centre for worship and for offering prayers. Road located by the side of the Sivagiri Mutt is a busy road. It is lying very close to a canal. The petitioners allege that to the surprise of the petitioners and local people, cracks developed in the retaining wall and several portions of the wall fell down to the canal. According to the petitioners, the clay used to fill up the portion had gone down and as a result cracks developed in various portions of the retaining wall. Hence, the petitioners have come up before this Court for appropriate direction.
3. In the detailed counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it was contended that the retaining wall constructed is intact and it is not correct that certain portions of the retaining wall have fallen down to the adjacent T.S. Canal. It is contended that the retaining wall is not in a dangerous situation and it will not cause any danger to the public and devotees who park the vehicles adjoining the retaining wall. It is also stated that the petitioners
WPC No.17085/2013 3 have never given any complaint to the department concerned regarding the matter.
4. Arguments have been heard.
5. According to the petitioners, the retaining wall is in the verge of falling down to the TS Canal which is located about 100 ft. below the road in question. According to the petitioners, this dangerous situation has arisen solely due to the negligent and callous attitude of the respondents who are duty bound to protect the public money and safety of public at large. According to them, the retaining wall fell down only because of the use of substandard materials. The petitioners point out that instead of using river sand, it appears that they have used quarry waste powder and other substandard materials for the construction. The petitioners relied on Exts.P1 to P4 photographs to show the present condition of the retaining wall. According to the petitioners, the retaining wall and the road widening works were carried out by spending `1.5 crores from
WPC No.17085/2013 4 the state exchequer. According to the State, the PWD authorities have thoroughly inspected the retaining wall on 17.7.2013 during the rainy season and found the structure intact and there is no sign of instability in the retaining wall. Five photographs which were taken during the rainy season were produced and marked as Ext.R3(a). It is an admitted fact that every year thousands of people are visiting the Sivagiri Mutt and Pilgrimage Centre and their vehicles will have to be parked on the side of the road which is now being protected by a retaining wall.
6. As different versions are there regarding the condition of the retaining wall, this writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent Superintending Engineer, PWD (Roads & Bridges), Thiruvananthapuram to make a local inspection of the retaining wall made mention of in the petition in the presence of the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this
WPC No.17085/2013 5 judgment. The date of inspection shall be intimated to the petitioners. If on inspection it is satisfied that immediate repairs to the retaining wall is required, steps shall be taken to get the retaining wall repaired without much delay.
sd/-A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE