The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to the Municipal Corporation (MC), Chandigarh over a PIL seeking investigation into the submission of a “tampered” Detailed Project Report (DPR) by the civic body.
Hearing the public interest litigation (PIL) concerning dumping ground at Dadumajra, the division bench of Acting Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Lapita Banerji issued a notice in response to an application filed by the petitioner in the case, advocate Amit Sharma. The application was filed by Sharma under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Sharma in the application had highlighted the severe consequences of Chandigarh’s escalating garbage crisis, which according to him underscores the “intentional failure” of the MC to fulfill its constitutional and statutory obligations. He had also mentioned submission of “false status and action taken reports” to the high court by the civic body.
Further, the PIL had noted the issuance of a notice to the respondents, by the high court on July 20, 2023, in response to a previous application seeking prosecution of officers under Sections 340 read with 195 of CrPC, for filing false affidavits and misleading statements in court. Sharma had argued that despite this, on November 16, 2023, the respondents submitted a tampered DPR, purportedly from IIT, without providing a copy to the petitioner, as documented in the court’s order dated November 16, 2023.
During the resumed hearing, Sharma claimed that upon scrutiny of the DPR, he identified significant irregularities, including discrepancies in the expertise of the person who signed the report, who was from electrical engineering in IIT instead of civil engineering (which is required for this project), and over 150 handwritten tampering on financial estimates. He also said the DPR deviated from prescribed guidelines, violating the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, and directives from the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
The PIL also highlighted the MC’s consistent pattern of violating the law and disregarding directives from the NGT and the court. Despite multiple orders and detailed directions, the respondents have failed to comply with legal provisions, as admitted by the municipal commissioner during the proceedings, argued Sharma.