Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 334 (ALL)

Mohd. Shahid v. State of U. P.

2016-01-25

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, YASHWANT VARMA

body2016
JUDGMENT Yashwant Varma,J. The grievance which has been urged in the petition which has been filed in the public interest is in regard to the manner in which the work of laying underground cables is being carried out by the second respondent, the Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. at Kannauj. The grievance is that the cables are being laid in violation of the safety standards prescribed by the Indian Standards Institution (ISI) and in some places are being laid at a depth of a mere 20-30 cms and that no safety standards are being followed. 2. Having regard to this grievance, this Court by its order dated 5 January 2016 called for a counter affidavit from the second respondent elaborating the technical specifications of work and the safety standards which are being followed while laying down the underground cables. Accordingly, a counter affidavit has been filed by the Executive Engineer, U.P. Power Corporation Limited, District Kannauj, the third respondent. The counter affidavit states that the work of laying of underground cables at Nagar Panchayat Tirwaganj, district Kannauj is being carried out in accordance with the standards laid down by the ISI. Moreover, it has been stated that the work is being carried out under the joint supervision of the second respondent and Tata Power Company Ltd. through its distribution unit in Delhi. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the counter affidavit contain relevant averments indicating the manner in which the work of laying down the underground cables has been carried out in a manner consistent with the ISI standards. At this stage, in view of the counter affidavit, there is no concrete material before the Court to indicate that there has been a breach of the safety norms. However, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met by leaving it open to the petitioner, if he is so advised, to bring any concrete breach to the notice of the Collector and District Magistrate, Kannauj. The Collector, in the event, that he finds that there is some actionable material, may cause a spot verification to be made so as to maintain a general oversight on the work which has been carried out. 3. The petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.