‘Have you seen the muck?’: Chief Justice Sheel Nagu fumes over state of Sector 26 vegetable market in Chandigarh

The Punjab and Haryana High Court asked the Chandigarh administration to provide temporary relief pending the Supreme Court decision on shifting the market to Sector 39.

Written by Manraj Grewal Sharma

Chandigarh | Updated: September 17, 2025 08:33 PM IST

3 min read

The division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry took up the matter after Yadav complained that the Bar Association had revived disciplinary proceedings against him in retaliation for the PIL and that he feared expulsion from the association.

The court emphasised that the stay order did not exempt the administration from its duty to maintain hygiene and accessibility. (Express File Photo by Kamleshwar Singh)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court Wednesday pressed the Chandigarh administration to explain why it has failed to provide even temporary facilities at the Sector 26 vegetable and fruit market, which has long drawn complaints of filth, congestion and poor access.

A division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry asked pointedly whether the UT had made any practical arrangements for vendors and consumers while the proposed relocation of the market to Sector 39 remains tied up in litigation.

“Have you seen the muck that is there? You cannot even step into that market,” Chief Justice Sheel Nagu observed, after UT counsel said that the Supreme Court stayed the e-auction process for shops at the new site in April this year.

The court emphasised that the stay order did not exempt the administration from its duty to maintain hygiene and accessibility. “It may have been stayed, but that does not prevent you from making some temporary arrangement for the general public at large,” the Chief Justice said.

Appearing for the UT, Additional Standing Counsel Aman Pal and Mahima Dogra submitted that a third-party contractor, appointed by the marketing committee, was responsible for sanitation and upkeep in Sector 26. Pal said the market committee had been issuing penalties and show-cause notices to the contractor for lapses.

He said demolitions of illegal structures were carried out in August. New security and cleaning agencies had also been engaged, he added.

The judges, however, were not satisfied and demanded to see photographs of improvement, if any, in the vegetable mandi. At one point, he even sought photos of the Sector 39 market. Both times, the UT standing counsel had no answer.

Story continues below this ad

When he sought to read out the deliberations by officials on the subject, Chief Justice Nagu snapped. “We are not concerned with your minutes of meetings. Please tell us what arrangement you have made… Have you laid pavers or something so that people can walk in and out without slush during the monsoon?”

The bench directed the UT to place photographs and records on file to demonstrate any improvements on the ground Friday.

Shifting of market caught in legal tangle

The shifting of the Sector 26 market has been debated for nearly two decades. In 2008, the UT had decided to move the market to Sector 39, citing worsening congestion and insanitary conditions. But the plan soon became embroiled in legal challenges.

Vendors secured injunctions from trial courts to block the move. The UT and the Centre later succeeded in getting those orders vacated by the High Court, only for the matter to be taken to the Supreme Court. In April 2025, the apex court stayed the e-auction process for allotting shops at the new site, leaving the relocation in limbo.

Story continues below this ad

Despite this, the High Court noted in its July 30 interim order that the administration could not run the existing mandi in a “disorderly fashion” and directed the UT to file an affidavit on the arrangements being made.

From the homepage