Blog

It is the duty of concerned authorities to inquire into the non-completion of construction of Drainage Work between Beur More and Mithpur Bus Stand – Storm Water Drainage work for which the technical and administrative sanction is pending before the Department despite direction of The District Magistrate cum President is upheld by the High Court of Patna through the learned bench led by HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR in the case of Niwaran Sewa Sansthan Vs. The State of Bihar. (Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19909 of 2021)

Brief facts of the case are that petitioner requested that the pathetic conditions of roads and sewerage in the western – southern side of Patna Town be taken into consideration. This petition is filed as a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order/s, Directions, instructing the Respondents to consider the Petitioner’s Representation dated 09.09.2021, filed with the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna , in which the Petitioner has requested that the pathetic conditions of roads and sewerage in the western – southern side of Patna Town be taken into consideration. Furtherr directing the concerned authorities to inquire into the non-completion of construction of Drainage Work between Beur More and Mithpur Bus Stand – Storm Water Drainage work for which the technical and Administrative sanction is pending before the Department despite direction of The District Magistrate cum President, District Urban Development Agency, Patna dated 15.07.2014 contained in Letter.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed in D. N. Jeevaraj Vs. Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka & Ors, (2016) 2 SCC 653, procedural technicalities ought to take a back seat in public interest litigation as held in Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. [Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P., 1989 Supp (1) SCC 504. The writ petitions before the court are not inter-party disputes, but rather public interest litigation, and the issue before the court is whether mining in the region should be authorised or prohibited for the sake of social safety and providing a hazard-free environment for the people to live in. When an issue of severe public importance is up for review before the court, every technicality in the procedural law is not accessible as a defence.

The court further stated that There has already been a lot about public interest litigation, thus, to add that when it comes to questions of good governance, the courts should be a little more lenient in accepting public interest lawsuits.  However, problems of minor importance or litigation primarily directed at one organisation or individual should not be entertained or should be entertained only in exceptional circumstances. Other options are open to PIL litigants, and they should be encouraged to pursue them.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the authority concerned, respondent, the Patna Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner, Maurya Lok, Patna, or any other statutory authority, to consider and decide the representation that the petitioner will be filing within four weeks for redress of the grievance. According to learned counsel for the respondents, if the petitioner files such a representation, the authority concerned must consider and dispose of it promptly, ideally within four months of its filing, along with a copy of this order.

The petition has been dismissed. Within four weeks of today, the petitioner must file a representation for redress of the grievance with the relevant authority. The petition has been dismissed off. The petitioner may file a representation for redress of the grievance with the relevant authority within four weeks of today, and when the petitioner seeks such remedies as are otherwise available in law before the appropriate forum, the matter will be handled in accordance with the law and with reasonable dispatch. The petitioner also has the option of mentioning the petition in order for it to be listed as a priority. When such a notice is made, Registry will take steps to list the petition as soon as possible.

Click here to read the judgment

Judgement reviewed by – Pooja Lakshmi