CAUSE TITLE:
Pauly Vadakkan V. Corporation of Cochin & Ors.
DATE OF ORDER:
14 June, 2022
JUDGE(S):
The Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran
PARTIES:
Petitioner(s): Pauly Vadakkan
Respondent(s): Corporation of Cochin &Ors.
SUBJECT
- Writpetition (civil) was filed, asking the High Court to give an interim order to the concerned authorities to repair the road where the accident occurred in 2019 without further delay.
OVERVIEW
- An accident occurred in 2019 on a road, where repair and maintenance work was in progress. This happened due to the absence of warning signs and barriers that should have been placed at the site.
ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY THE PETITIONER
- The petitioners' learned counsel drew to the Court's attention an accident that occurred a few days ago in Tripunithura, in which a young man was dead because appropriate warning signs and barriers were not put at a work site.
ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENTS
- It was claimed that quick efforts had been taken to determine blame, and that the Engineers involved, as well as the Contractor, had been suspended with cases filed against them.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
- The Court was concerned that the usual pattern of determining blame after an occurrence could no longer be tolerated. What must be done is to avoid accidents, for which all necessary precautionary measures must be taken on the ground level while work is being carried out. Because vehicles are rapidly moving and people are in a hurry, this is definitely required in current times.
- The Court was concerned that while work was being done – whether on roads, bridges, or other structures – there were insufficient lights and other warning indications, putting people in danger, either carelessly or despite taking essential precautions.
- The fact that Engineers/Contractors were held accountable after the occurrence would be of no consolation to the victim's family or the injured; and it was rather disturbing that such incidents continue to occur even as technology advances.
- As a result, the Court questioned the learned Senior Government Pleader if there were any mechanisms in place for enforcing security and safety measures at active construction projects. He will consult with officials and then return to the Court, according to the submission.
- This was a subject that required the Government's and the PWD's immediate attention because, while not published, it is common knowledge that every ongoing project attracts a number of accidents due to a lack of sufficient warning signs, lighting, and other similar items. Most of our roads are dimly lit, making it difficult to spot construction, especially at speeds of above 40 km/hr. This is the bane of our system, and it must be addressed by the appropriate authorities as soon as possible.
- In terms of determining blame, the Engineers and Officers in Charge of the Work will have to be held principally responsible; and until deterrent consequences are applied, accidents will continue to be a saga. Officers/Engineers will only apply the appropriate caution if they fear and respect the law. They must provide the same level of care as if the work were being done by themselves. The majority of the time, this is ignored, and common citizens' lives are jeopardised.
CONCLUSION
- The Court did state, however, that if a similar incidence was brought to the Court's attention in the future, the involved Engineer and Supervisory Officer would be held principally liable to the full extent of the law.
- The appropriate authorities had to respond to these remarks with a proper counter-pleading. The subject will be discussed again on June 23.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
