“We hope the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) will be able to finish pothole repair work at least by Christmas.”
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice S. Sujatha made this observation on Saturday after the High Court of Karnataka was informed that the repair work was still in progress. The Bench was hearing PIL petitions about the poor state of city roads and the lack of a mechanism in the civic body to maintain them.
Earlier, BBMP counsel V. Sreenidhi told the court that stretches of roads with potholes were being repaired and that improvement of roads was “gradually and substantially” under progress. He also pointed out that the BBMP was working in tandem with the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB).
On the other hand, the counsel for the petitioners pointed out that in many places attended to by the BBMP, potholes were already resurfacing.
The Bench asked Dinesh Agrawal, superintending engineer, CWE (Army), Military Engineering Services, Bengaluru, who was appointed as a court commissioner to study the BBMP’s pothole repair work, to participate in a forthcoming meeting of the coordination panel on December 4 for the limited purpose of giving suggestions on improving Bengaluru’s road infrastructure.
On hoardings
The Bench, while hearing a PIL petition on illegal advertisement hoardings, asked the Transport Department to make a categorical statement on whether banned plastic materials were used for displaying advertisements on buses. The direction came after a circular was presented merely indicating the instructions issued to ensure that no plastic material was used in such ads.
Meanwhile, the court directed a petitioner, who had complained that a sub-inspector of police was transferred after he registered an FIR against Minister D.K. Shivakumar and others for not removing an illegal hoarding, to ascertain his claim after the Advocate-General said the PSI was not transferred at all. Though the petitioner’s counsel then clarified that it was an assistant PSI, the court asked him ascertain the claim nevertheless.
The Bench also asked the BBMP counsel to respond to the allegation that there were huge discrepancies about the number of illegal hoardings, as the civic body had given different figures to the Lokayukta and the High Court. It also cautioned a petitioner, who had filed an affidavit commenting on the transfer of BBMP officials, to be cautious in future against making comments not linked to the cause of litigation. The court expunged the comments.
Further hearing was adjourned till December 4.
