The Uttarakhand High Court recently disposed of a PIL alleging irregularities committed by the agency in the construction of the new pipeline under the Jal Jeewan Mission scheme.
According to petitioner Himanshu Bhatt, since the old pipeline was worn out, therefore, the State Government had sanctioned a new pipeline for supply of drinking water to his village under the Jal Jeewan Mission.
In the PIL, the petitioner contended that several irregularities have been committed by the Agency, which constructed the new pipeline, inasmuch as, not only the alignment of the pipeline was changed to favour some private individuals, but also substandard material, including inferior pipes, were used.
Per contra, D.S. Patni, Senior Counsel appearing for respondents, has disputed the contentions raised by petitioner in the PIL and submitted that everything was done as per sanctioned Detailed Project Report.
The Division Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Justice Alok Kumar Verma observed that since the petitioner has raised an issue regarding change of alignment and also use of sub-standard material in constructing the drinking water pipeline, it permitted the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate, Dehradun, in a representative capacity, and the District Magistrate shall look into the matter. If need be, he could constitute a committee to have the Scheme inspected and pass an order, in accordance with the law, within some stipulated time frame.
Also Read: Madras High Court dismisses PIL against use of Tamil mantras as opposed to Sanskrit in temples
“Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach District Magistrate, Dehradun by making a representation. If such representation is made within two weeks from today, District Magistrate shall look into the allegations, and if need be, he shall also constitute a committee of Technical Experts, and based on such report to be submitted by Technical Experts, District Magistrate shall pass appropriate order, in accordance with law, within three months,”
the order reads.
However, the Bench granted liberty to the Petitioner to again approach the High Court if any grievance of the petitioner still remains, after the decision of the District Magistrate, Dehradun.