Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 210 (GAU)

DEBAJYOTI DEY v. STATE OF ASSAM

2014-02-19

A.K.GOSWAMI, A.M.SAPRE

body2014
JUDGMENT A.M. Sapre, J. Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.U. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs.B. Goyal, learned Government Advocate, Assam and Mr.B. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Water Resources Department. This petition (PIL) is filed by 30 petitioners who are residents of Tarapur Shib Bari Road, Silchar. Their main grievance in filing this PIL is relating to embankment of a patch measuring 175 metres on the Silchar-Kalaian Road from Ch 05 metres to 175 metres. Notice of this petition was issued upon the concerned State authority. They are served and duly represented. Ms. B. Goyal, learned Government Advocate, Assam, on instructions, submits that all necessary remedial steps are being taken by the concerned authority by handing over the road in question to PWD (Roads) Department to make it suitable for its use as ‘road’. It is also submitted that till such time the road is not made suitable for its use as ‘road’, heavy vehicles will not be allowed to ply over it. We are satisfied with the statement made by Ms. B. Goyal, learned Government Advocate, Assam so also the counsel appearing for the petitioners because once the remedial steps suggested by the State Counsel are implemented in its letter and spirit, then the grievance raised by the petitioners in this PIL shall be fully met and would no longer be faced by the residents of the area which includes the petitioners. Since the State has taken steps to remedy the grievance, we do not wish to keep the petition pending and close the same with a direction to the respondents (concern authorities of the State) to ensure implementation of the statements made before the Court through the State counsel on instructions from the State and take all remedial steps and bring it to its logical conclusion preferably before the monsoon set-in this year. The petitioners would always be at liberty to renew their grievances, if the respondents do not ensure compliance of the statement made before this Court, if occasion so arises in future. No cost.