Journalism of Courage
Advertisement
Premium

Chandigarh fined 20,000 for not filing reply in Dadumajra garbage case, MC says will clear it by May 31

The municipal corporation told the court that no fresh waste was being dumped at Dadumajra

garbage dumpGarbage heaped at a garbage dump. (Representational Image/Express Photo)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday imposed a cost of Rs 20,000 on the Chandigarh UT administration for failing to file a reply in the Dadumajra garbage dump case, despite the lapse of over three months. The court noted that the municipal corporation had already filed its affidavit, stating that of the 2.42 lakh metric tonnes of waste at the dump, 42,000 metric tonnes had been cleared and the rest would be removed by May 31.

The matter pertains to ongoing public interest litigation concerning the Dadumajra garbage dump, in which the petitioner, Advocate Amit Sharma, has alleged a consistent pattern of perjury and institutional misrepresentation on the part of both the Municipal Corporation and the UT administration.

During the resumed hearing on Tuesday, a division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel asked the municipal corporation to specify a timeline for clearing the dump. Advocate Gaurav Mohunta, appearing for the MC, submitted that three agencies were working on the site and that the remaining waste would be cleared by May 31. He said two older dumps had already been removed, the soil had been bioremediated, and an integrated solid waste management plant was coming up at the site.

Responding to a query from the bench, Mohunta assured the court that the proposed facility would be capable of handling the city’s entire waste output. “No fresh garbage is being dumped there,” he added. “All waste generated by the city—mixed, dry, wet, even horticultural—is being processed.”

The court passed the cost order against the UT administration after noting its continued failure to respond, despite directions issued in February.. When UT counsel Tanmoy Gupta argued that the administration was not a party to the specific application, Sharma countered that the UT had itself requested the matters to be clubbed in 2022. He referred to an order dated November 16, 2023, in which the administration submitted a document said to be a tender “about to be floated,” but never shared it with the petitioner. “They have been playing these games for the longest time, and they continue to mislead the court for six, seven years now. It’s like an SOP (standard operating procedure),” he told the bench.

The cost imposed by the court is to be deposited in the patients’ welfare fund at PGIMER.

Sharma also sought liberty to file a consolidated reply to both the MC and UT affidavits, alleging that the corporation’s reply contained false claims.

The matter will now be heard on July 23.

My Express

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Tags:
  • Dadumajra
Edition
Install the Express App for
a better experience
Featured
Trending Topics
News
Multimedia
Follow Us
Express InvestigationAfter tax havens, dirty money finds a new home: Cryptocurrency
X