C.P.Ajithkumar vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 6754 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
          Tuesday, the 14th day of June 2022 / 24th Jyaishta, 1944
                         WP(C) NO. 32680 OF 2008(M)
PETITIONER:

  1. C.P.AJITHKUMAR, PROPRIETOR, SUBURBAN TRAVELS, MAMANGALAM,
     COCHIN-24,(PRESIDENT, TRAVEL, OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF KERALA).
  2. KERALA MERCHANTS UNION (FORMERLY ERNAKULAM MERCHANTS UNION),
     MERCHANTS UNION BUILDING, MERCHANTS UNION ROAD, COCHIN-11,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY.

BY ADVOCATE    SRI.TOM K.THOMAS

RESPONDENTS:

  1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC
     WORKS DEPARTMENT, (ROADS), GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.
  2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT,
     TRIVANDRUM.
  3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), TRIVANDRUM.
  4. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BOAT JETTY,
     ERNAKULAM.
  5. GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KADAVANTHARA, ERNAKULAM,
     COCHIN-20, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
      ADDITIONAL R6 AND R7 IMPLEADED
  6. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (NATIONAL HIGHWAYS), TRIVANDRUM-695033.
  7. THE REGIONAL OFFICER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, OFFICE OF
     THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (NATIONAL HIGHWAYS), TRIVANDRUM-695033. (ADDDL.
     R6 AND R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28.11.2088 IN
     IA.15338/2008).
      ADDITIONAL R8 AND R9 IMPLEADED
  8. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT COCHIN, NATIONAL
     HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MANGALYA VAIDHYA MADOM, VYTILA,
     ERNAKULAM.
  9. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT PALAKKAD, NATIONAL
     HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, ARMUGHAM COLONY, CHANDRA NAGAR,
     PALAKKAD. (ADDL.R8 AND R9 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
     17.12.2008 IN I.A.16206/2008 IN WP(C) 32680/2008)
       ADDITIONAL R10 IMPLEADED
 10. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF SURFACE
     TRANSPORT, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI. (ADDL.R10 IS IMPLEADED AS
     PER ORDER 30.03.2009 IN I.A.4647/2009 IN WP(C) 32680/2008)
       ADDITIONAL R11 IMPLEADED
 11. CENTRE FOR CONSUMER EDUCATION, MARKET ROAD, PALAI, REPRESENTED BY
     ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE DEJO KAPPAN, AGED 54, S/O.LATE K.C.JOSEPH,
     RESIDING AT 17 A, PRESIDENCY HOMES, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. (ADDL.R11 IS
     IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER 12.10.2011 DATED IN IA.15616/2011.)
     ADDITIONAL R12 AND R13 IMPLEADED
 12. KERALA GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, HEAD OFFICE SREEKUMAR
    BUILDING, IRON BRIDGES.P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688001, REPRESENTED BY ITS
    PRESIDENT VARGHESE KANNAMPALLY-688001.
13. P.R.ASHOKUMAR, RAMAPRIYA, PARAYAKADU.P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA
    DISTRICT-688001.
     (ADDL.R12 AND R13 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.10.2011 IN
    I.A.15475/2011.)
    ADDITIONAL R14 IMPLEADED
14. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. (IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS
    ADDL.R14 AS PER ORDER DATED 11.10.2019 IN WPC.)
     ADDITIONAL R15 SUO MOTU IMPLEADED
15. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, ERNAKULAM
    IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R15 AS PER ORDER DATED 17.12.2021 IN
    WP(C) 32680/2008.
     ADDITIONAL R16 IMPLEADED
16. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI. (IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS
    ADDL.R16 AS PER ORDER DATED 14-01-2022 IN WP(C) 32680/2008).




     BY SRI. K.V.MANOJ KUMAR, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 TO R3, R14
AND R16

    BY SRI. JANARDHANA SHENOY, STANDING COUNSEL FOR R4

    BY SRI. M.K.THANKAPPAN, ADVOCATE FOR R5

    BY SRI. SEBASTIAN THOMAS, ADVOCATE FOR R6 AND R7

    BY SRI. THOMAS ANTONY, ADVOCATE FOR R8 AND R9

    BY SRI. S. KRISHNAMOORTHY, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL FOR R10

    BY SRI. JOHNSON MANAYANI, ADVOCATE FOR R11

    BY SRI. JOMY GEORGE, ADVOCATE FOR R12 AND R13

    BY SMT. M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, STANDING COUNSEL FOR CSML

    BY SRI. MATHEWS K. PHILIP, STANDING COUNSEL FOR NHAI

    M/S. S. KRISHNA, P.DEEPAK AND VINOD BHAT, AMICUS CURIAE



        This Writ Petition (Civil) having coming up for orders on
14.06.2022, and upon perusing this court's judgment dated 18.10.2019 and
order dated 03.06.2022, the Court on the same day passed the following.




                                                       P.T.O
                   DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
          --------------------------------------------------
          W.P.(C)Nos.32680/2008 & 34310/2019
          --------------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 14th day of June, 2022

                           O R D E R

Smt.S.Krishna - learned Amicus Curiae, submitted that

the list of roads within the Corporation of Kochi and those

owned by the Public Works Department (PWD), has been

handed over to the learned counsel for both the said

Authorities.

2. Sri.K.V.Manoj Kumar - learned Senior Government

Pleader for the PWD and Sri.Janardhana Shenoy - learned

Standing Counsel for the Corporation of Kochi, are, therefore,

directed to file a consolidated statement showing the roads

which are under repair, or which require to be repaired, by

the next posting date. The said report should also show the

status of work that has been initiated/to be initiated. It will

further contain the status of all roads mentioned by this Court WPC 32680/08 & 34310/19

in the earlier orders, particularly orders dated 14.01.2022,

27.05.2022 and 03.06.2022.

3. Sri.Jomy George - learned counsel for the petitioners

in WP(C)No.34310/2019, brought to my notice that an accident

happened a few days ago at Tripunithura, in which, a young

man was killed solely because necessary warning signs and

barriers had not been placed at a site where the work was

going on. He added that the pillion rider was seriously injured.

4. I see that this aspect has been referred to by the

learned Amici Curiae in their report.

5. Sri.K.V.Manoj Kumar - learned Senior Government

Pleader, submitted that immediate steps have been taken to fix

responsibility and that the Engineers concerned are placed under

suspension, with cases charged against them, as also the

Contractor.

6. I am afraid that this normal pattern that we see - of

fixing responsibility after the incident - cannot be condoned any

further. What is required to be done is to avoid accidents for WPC 32680/08 & 34310/19

which, all necessary precautionary steps will have to be ensured

on the ground level, when a work is going on. This is

absolutely necessary in these times because vehicles are fast

moving and people are in a hurry.

7. Whatever be the intricate details of the accident

referred above, a suspicion is raised as to whether it could have

been averted, had there been a proper barricading and such

other. I must, however, make it clear that I am not speaking

more on this incident because it is covered by an ongoing

investigation.

8. However, this Court certainly is concerned that when

a work is going on - be that on roads, bridges and such other

- there are no sufficient lights and other warning signals,

leading to people being put to danger, either carelessly or in

spite of necessary care.

9. The fact that Engineers/Contractors are taken to task

after the incident would be of no solace to the family of the

victim or to the injured; and it is rather disconcerting that even WPC 32680/08 & 34310/19

when technology is advanced, incidents like this still happen.

10. I, therefore, asked the learned Senior Government

Pleader whether there are any protocols with respect to the

security and safety measures to be enforced in the ongoing

work sites. He submitted that he will consult the officials and

revert to this Court.

11. This is a matter that certainly must engage the

attention of the Government and the PWD specifically because,

though not reported, it is common knowledge that every

ongoing work attracts several accidents because of lack of

proper warning signs, lights and such other. Most of our roads

are not lit much and it is difficult to discern a work, especially

when one travels at speeds over 40 k.m. or so. This is the bane

of our system, which will require to be reflected upon by the

competent Authorities without any delay.

12. We often talk about countries other than ours, when

speaking about progress; but when it comes to our

neighbourhood, we are oblivious to the various requirements WPC 32680/08 & 34310/19

that are mandatory. I do not think that we can make any

further delay and specific protocols will have to be thought of

and implemented without reservation. These protocols certainly

must cover all the works in Kerala and not merely those which

are undertaken by the PWD.

13. As regards fixing of responsibility is concerned, the

Engineers and Officers in charge of the work will have to be

made primarily accountable; and unless penalties, which operate

as deterrent, are imposed, accidents will remain a continuing

saga. It is only if the Officers/Engineers have fear and respect

for law, will they exercise necessary caution. The standard of

care required by them certainly is as if the work is being done

by themselves. This is most of the time forgotten and the lives

of ordinary citizens are imperiled.

14. My afore observations shall be answered by the

competent Authorities by the next posting date, through a

proper counter pleading.

15. I, however, make it clear that if any such incident is WPC 32680/08 & 34310/19

brought to the notice of this Court in future, the concerned

Engineer and Supervisory Officer will be held primarily

responsible to its fullest warrant. As I have said above, the

particular incident mentioned above is not solely reflected in

this order, though, if it becomes necessary in future, it will also

be taken note of.

Post on 23.6.2022.

H/o

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, RR/14.06.2022 JUDGE

14-06-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar