A Bombay High Court Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Arif S Doctor have instructed the BMC to submit details of the inquiry into construction lapses concerning the Lalbaug flyover within six weeks. The directive is related to disclosing the findings of the enquiry conducted by the Statutory Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) regarding any lapses or breaches by the contractor in the construction of the flyover. The High Court's decision underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in construction projects, emphasizing the need for thorough investigations into potential shortcomings in the infrastructure development process.
In a significant development, the Bombay High Court has directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to furnish comprehensive details of the inquiry into construction lapses concerning the Lalbaug flyover. The flyover, constructed in 2012, developed cracks within a mere five years, prompting a closer examination of potential breaches in its construction. The Bench was presided over by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Arif S Doctor.
The court instructed the BMC to submit an affidavit within six weeks, disclosing findings from the inquiry conducted by the Statutory Technical Advisory Committee (STAC). Specifically, the court sought information on any identified lapses or breaches by the contractor involved in the construction process. Moreover, the court emphasized the need for clarity on punitive actions that could be taken against the contractor, emphasizing that such measures should align with the severity of the identified breaches.
The court's attention was drawn to this matter during a hearing on a petition filed by civil engineer Bhagvanji Raiyani, represented by advocate Sumedha Ra. Raiyani. Raiyani, concerned about the safety of commuters, urged the court to hold the contractor accountable for the faulty construction and requested a structural audit of the Lalbaug flyover.
During the proceedings, the bench noted that a 2017 inquiry conducted by the STAC had merely accepted the findings of the Structural Audit Report without clearly delineating the causes of the flyover's deterioration. The court expressed its concern over this lack of clarity and stressed the need for accountability, remarking that those responsible for potential structural issues should face legal consequences.
The court also sought details regarding any actions taken against the contractor by the BMC. Specifically, the court questioned whether the BMC had initiated recovery measures or blacklisted the contractor.
In response, the BMC counsel explained that, while the bridge had not collapsed, a show-cause notice had been issued to Simplex Infrastructure, the company responsible for the project. However, the company subsequently went into liquidation, raising questions about the efficacy of punitive measures undertaken by the BMC.
It is noteworthy that in a similar case filed by Raiyani in March 2017, the court had instructed the BMC commissioner to investigate any construction lapses in the Lalbaug flyover and take appropriate action if deemed necessary. Additionally, the court had directed the state government to consider forming a panel of experts to examine the reasons behind the flyover's deterioration within five years, with the aim of establishing guidelines for future construction projects.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
