A bench led by Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela emphasized that regardless of whether the funds come from the Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation (TTDC) or the Public Works Department (PWD), the financial burden ultimately rests with the Delhi government.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court expressed strong disapproval on Monday(25th Nov) regarding a funding dispute between two state government departments concerning repairs for a flyover near Nathu Colony Chowk.
A bench led by Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela emphasized that regardless of whether the funds come from the Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation (TTDC) or the Public Works Department (PWD), the financial burden ultimately rests with the Delhi government.
The court raised concerns about accountability if the flyover were to collapse, stating, “You are admitting there are structural defects. If it collapses tomorrow, who will be liable? Safety is paramount. Human lives matter most.”
The bench criticized the ongoing delay, remarking that disputes over financial or technical issues are irrelevant when public safety is at risk. It questioned why two wings of the same government the GNCTDwere opposing each other, particularly when the flyover’s structural problems were acknowledged.
BRIEF FACTS
The hearing after a PIL filed by BJP MLA Jitendra Mahajan, seeking directions for the prompt repair and reopening of the flyover. The PWD counsel argued that since TTDC constructed the flyover in 2015, it should handle repairs. Conversely, the TTDC counsel stated that it awaited Rs 8 crore from PWD to pay the original contractor.
READ ALSO: “He Can’t Be So Helpless”: Delhi HC Slams MLA’s Plea for Flyover Repair Direction
The bench expressed frustration over the government’s inability to prioritize infrastructure funding, noting that this issue recurs in various cases.
“Hospitals are nearly complete but lack funding. One-stop centers aren’t receiving payments for months. You’re creating an impression of having no money,” the court remarked.
Senior advocate Kirti Uppal, representing the petitioner, highlighted how bureaucratic onus-shifting causes public inconvenience. The court criticized the overall state of infrastructure financing and directed the government’s standing counsel, Santosh Kumar Tripathi, to seek instructions.
The PIL emphasized that construction defects identified in 2015 remain unresolved, causing significant public inconvenience as the flyover remains closed to heavy vehicles.
The next hearing is scheduled for November 26.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
