The Telangana High Court on Wednesday sought to know from Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Commissioner under what circumstances he had permitted the Exhibition Society to hold the Numaish at the allotted venue. A division bench comprising Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and Justice T. Amarnath Goud directed the GHMC Commissioner to file an affidavit on the matter.
The Bench passed the direction while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by a lawyer, Khaja Aijazuddin, on the Numaish. He sought closure of the ongoing Numaish immediately stating that it was thrown open to public again even after a fire accident resulted in huge loss of property to scores of stall owners.
The Bench also directed the Director General of Police to deploy adequate number of police personnel at the venue to evacuate people in case of an emergency.
ADVERTISEMENT
Measures in place
The two directions were to be complied with by Monday. It instructed the Disaster Response and Fire Services Director General to reveal safety measures put in place at the Industrial Exhibition. The DG should also appraise the court of the infrastructure available for evacuation of people and goods in case of a fire accident at Numaish.
Hearing reply of special government pleader Sharath Kumar on the points raised by the party-in-person petitioner, Justice Chauhan asked how many fire-tenders were deployed at the venue before and after the recent fire accident. When a Fire Services officer present in the court explained that four fire-tenders were available at the Numaish, the judge asked if they were sufficient to cover the area spread over 24 acres.
ADVERTISEMENT
Though the officer replied in the affirmative, the Bench remarked that it was not convinced by the points explained in the affidavit already filed by the Fire Services Department. The judge inquired about the minute points like how many exits were there and their measurements to assess if the steps taken by officials were adequate enough for carrying out rescue operations in case of an emergency.
“Moreover, the affidavit does not reveal the concrete steps being planned, which may be taken in order to evacuate the large number of people coming to Exhibition Ground,” the bench observed.
Exhibition to go on
Despite insistence of the petitioner to order for immediate closure of the exhibition, the judges declined stating that they will not issue instructions without hearing the stall owners who eke out livelihood with the running of the exhibition. “Judges should think about the consequences of their orders outside the court hall,” the bench observed, making it clear that it cannot order for closure of the exhibition.