Back
1997 Supreme(Sikk) 11
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
M. SENGUPTA
GULSHAN RAI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF SIKKIM - Respondents
W. P. 19 Of 1997
Decided On : August 12, 1997
A.Moulik, J.B.Pradhan, J.K.Chandak, L.Sherpa, R.B.Subba, S.P.WANGDI
The State has a positive duty to ensure the safety of its citizens and to take steps to prevent damage to property.
Headnote:
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION - BUILDING SAFETY - HOTEL DREAMLAND AND HOTEL HIMALCHULI - DIRECTIONS TO OWNERS AND STATE GOVERNMENT - ACT 11 OF 1985, S. 9.
Fact of the Case:
A PIL was filed alleging that two buildings, Hotel Dreamland and Hotel Himalchuli, were in a dangerous condition after a natural disaster and needed to be pulled down. The owners of the buildings challenged the maintainability of the petition and the dependability of the Expert Committee Report.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the buildings were in a dangerous condition and needed repairs. It directed the owners to take steps to repair the buildings and the State Government to take steps to prevent further damage.
Issues: 1. Whether the PIL was maintainable. 2. Whether the Expert Committee Report was dependable. 3. What steps should be taken to repair the buildings and prevent further damage.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the PIL was maintainable as the petitioners had a genuine concern for the safety of the residents of the affected areas. 2. The court held that the Expert Committee Report was dependable as it was prepared by a team of experts who had conducted a thorough investigation. 3. The court directed the owners of the buildings to take steps to repair the buildings and the State Government to take steps to prevent further damage.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the parties to move the Court to urge any point of like nature if and when occasion would arise.
( 1 ) THIS case started with an application filed by two individuals making certain complaints against the State Government for not taking appropriate steps for pulling down two of the buildings situated on the main road in a deplorable state after the calamity of nature on the 8th of June, 1997.
( 2 ) THE petition, in the nature of P. I. L. , was initially filed against the State of Sikkim represented through the Urban and Housing Development Department. Thereafter on the direction of this Court, the owners of the two buildings in question were made parties.
( 3 ) ON the direction of this Court, the State-respondents conducted a thorough investigation into the condition of the buildings, the extent of damage caused to the building, reason thereof and remedial measures. The State-respondents submitted that a high level Technical Committee was formed with members from different departments including Mines and Geology and Irrigation Department. The Technical Committee submitted report to the Government towards the end of July. The said report has been filed in this Court on behalf of the State-respondents by an affidavit. By two separate affidavits the owners of the two buildings challenged the maintainability of the petition itself and also the dependability of the Expert Committee Report.
( 4 ) THE buildings in question are popularly known an Hotel Himalchuli and Hotel Dream-land. We may take judicial notice of the event of loss of property and lives on account of the heavy downpour followed by massive landslides on the 8th June, 1997. Many buildings collapsed and numerous structures are in a very dilapidated or dangerous position.
( 5 ) ON the question of locus standi and bona fide of the petitioners, it has been contended that the petitioners run a few hotels and to feed fat the business rivalry, they have chosen these two buildings as two famous and busy hotels are run in these two houses. There is no doubt that the city of Gangtok got a big jolt during the natural disaster on the aforesaid date. There is also no denial of the fact that some areas and some buildings were affected very badly and most of the occupants of these areas and houses were to be evacuated to safer places and these two buildings were amongst the most affected buildings. The petitioners, might be owners of some hotels but at the same time they are residents of Sikkim and have concern for the safety of the residents of the affected areas. The plea that they have some business rivalry with the owners of these two buildings/hotels might not be ruled out. But for the other reasons as pointed out, we do not find much substance in the allegations and we propose to hold that the writ petition in the form of P. I. L. is in order and can be proceeded with.
( 6 ) WE find that the two impugned buildings which are popularly known as Hotels Himalchuli and Dreamland are situated on the National Highway and on the Palzor Stadium Road. It would be better if we look to the conditions of these two buildings through the eyes of the experts as available from the Technical Committee report. It would be pertinent to mention that the same Technical Committee as appointed by the Government submitted an exhaustive report identifying the locations of damage, extent of damage, reason behind the damage and the possible preventive measures to stop recurrence of such damage. The report submitted before us with respect to these two buildings are part of the whole report. It could not be made clear if the Government accepted or decided to act upon such a report. For the sake of convenience wemay deal with the buildings one after the other in the light of the report of the Technical Committee. Hotel Dreamland
( 7 ) IT is a seven storeyed building presently unoccupied by most of the occupants which included the boarders in the hotels, owners of the building and other tenants. Only one Shri Rama Shankar Prasad Gupta is occupying the ground floor and runs a shop styled as
