Punjab-Haryana High Court
Chander Shekhar Sood vs State Of Punjab And Others on 22 October, 2008
Bench: T.S.Thakur, Jasbir Singh
CWP No. 16987 of 2007 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 16987 of 2007
Date of Decision: 22.10.2008
Chander Shekhar Sood ..Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab and others ..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present : Mr. Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab for respondents
No.1 and 2
Mr.Rajdeep Singh Cheema, Advocate for respondent No. 3.
*****
T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral)
Status report filed by respondent No.3 is taken on record and CM No. 20672 of 2008 is disposed off.
This petition has been filed in public interest. It prays for a mandamus directing Deputy Commissioner, Moga to take action on the representation made by the petitioner and other residents of Moga in connection with removal of garbage from the thickly populated residential area of the city. In response to the notice issued by this Court, Municipal Council, Moga appeared and filed a counter affidavit which was examined by this Court on 10.7.2008 but found unsatisfactory. The Court noticed that garbage was scattered all over Moga City thereby creating serious health CWP No. 16987 of 2007 [2] hazards for its residents. Municipal Council, Moga was accordingly directed to clear the garbage and keep the city clean particularly during rainy season as perennial littering of garbage was a source of pollution and spread of diseases.
The Council has pursuant to the above directions filed a status report alongwith CM No. 20672 of 2008, from a perusal whereof it appears that there are nearly 60 collection centres of garbage within the municipal limits of Moga from where the clearance of garbage starts everyday at around 7.00 A.M. and continues till 2.00 P.M. As many as 200 regular employees and 305 Sweepers are said to be engaged in this activity to keep the city clean. Despite all these efforts, however, the residents are according to the status report continuing to litter the garbage even after the same has been removed. The Council, is according to the report, doing its best to educate the people regarding the menace of garbage littering and has placed flex boards near various collection prohibiting the same. Awareness programme also appears to have been undertaken by the Council to educate the public. Some residents of the area have also, according to the report, been fined for violations of the directions issued by the Council.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that while the Council has done its little bit to deal with the problems arising out of littering of garbage in the city of Moga, the problem is of a perennial nature and would require both long term and short term measures to effectively deal with the same. A one time clearance of the garbage from the places where the same is dumped does not provide a lasting solution. What is required is a mechanism that will work without the intervention of any external agency like a directives from the Court. The CWP No. 16987 of 2007 [3] Council has, therefore, done well to start the awareness campaign amongst the residents of Moga to discipline their habits and to punish those who violate the directives. Officers charged with the duty of cleaning garbage and keeping the city clean ought to be sensitized to ensure that there is no laxity whatsoever on account of negligence or apathy on their part. The petitioners can also in our opinion play a significant role in educating public opinion. It is not enough for a citizen to claim being a 'public activist' or to file a writ petition in this Court pointing out the problems and seek redress. It would be more useful for the Community for whose benefit the petition has been filed, if the petitioner himself comes forward to participate in an effort to deal with the problem like the one pointed out in these proceedings. It is only if citizen vigilant groups themselves help the authorities that they can possibly make a grievances about inaction and apathy on their part. While dealing with problems like hygienic and community health, participation of the Community is no less important than the efforts of the Municipal Authorities. Suffice it to say that while problem of garbage littering may have been handled for the present, the petitioner as also the respondent Council would do well to draw up both long term and short term programmes and to find a lasting solution by adopting innovative techniques and strategies for the same. In case of any inaction on the part of the authorities, the petitioner can bring the same to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner or file a suitable representation in which event Deputy Commissioner or the Executive Officer of the Council to whom such representation is addressed, would look into the same and take remedial CWP No. 16987 of 2007 [4] steps.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed off with the above directions leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
(T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (JASBIR SINGH) 22.10.2008 JUDGE 'ravinder'