Ravi Gopala Krishnan And Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors.
2017 Latest Caselaw 6958 Del

$~19
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                          W.P.(C) 7081/2016

%                              Date of decision : 4th December, 2017


RAVI GOPALA KRISHNAN AND ANR             ..... Petitioners
                 Through : Petitioners in person

                           versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                             ..... Respondents
                  Through :             Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Adv.
                                        for R-1/UOI
                                        Mr. Varun Nischal, Adv. for R-
                                        2/GNCTD
                                        Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Adv. for
                                        R-SDMC
                                        Mr. Manish Srivastava,
                                        Mr. Aditya Gupta and
                                        Ms. Shagun Trisal, Advs. for R-
                                        4/BRPL.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR

                      JUDGMENT (ORAL)

GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought the following prayers :

"a. Issue a writ or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to ensure that the LED lights installed on Public

Roads and Streets in South Delhi are functional and further directing the respondents to take appropriate action against the contractor/vendor for supplying spurious LED lights for public roads and streets in Delhi and for not maintaining the said lights properly and effectively.

b. Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. We had noted the issues flagged by the petitioner and issued directions by our order dated 24th May, 2017 to the Chief Engineer (Electrical) of the SDMC to physically inspect random sites in the three areas noted by us in our order and to certify on affidavit that the needful in terms of proper quality of street lights and the installations has been effected as well as to take measures for mitigation of the grievances of the petitioner.

3. A status report stands filed by Mr. Gaurang Kanth, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent no.4/SDMC as well as by Mr. Nischal Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent no.5/ESEL

4. Mr. Sanjay Jain, learned ASG has drawn our attention to the steps taken by the respondent no.5 in terms of the tripartite agreement as well as to redress the complaints regarding its installations.

5. The respondent no.5/SDMC has also filed a status report (at page 152) regarding the steps taken by it.

6. It is evident that the respondents have been put to adequate notice regarding the importance of ensuring functioning street lights of high quality and the need of ensuring maintenance thereof by the

respondents. The petitioners have a grievance that it is only because of orders passed by this court, that the respondents have woken up and taken some effort to rectify the deficiencies.

7. Be that as it may, the purpose stand achieved and it is not necessary to keep this writ petition pending.

8. We accordingly, dispose of this petition with a direction to all the respondents to nominate nodal officers (not below the rank of Superintending Engineer in the SDMC and not below the rank of Chief Engineer in the EESL). The respondents shall inform the petitioners about their appointment as well as their contact details by communication in writing. These nodal officers shall be responsible for redressing grievances which are notified by the petitioners to them regarding street lights. All complaints shall be in writing and the redressal shall be effected at the earliest and informed to the petitioners.

9. In case the petitioners are aggrieved by any action, omission or non-action by the respondents, it shall be open to them to seek redressal in accordance with law in respect thereof.

10. Given the complaints being made by the petitioners with regard to the nature and quality of the installations effected by respondent no.5, it shall be the responsibility of the nodal officer(s) to verify the nature and quality of the installations in the presence of the petitioners.

The date and time of the inspection shall be informed to the petitioners atleast three days in advance, in writing. Copy thereof shall be sent to the petitioners by registered post acknowledgement due.

10. The petitioners shall file a report in this court within four weeks from today.

Dasti to parties.

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

C.HARI SHANKAR, J DECEMBER 04, 2017 kr