Why act when there is judicial order: Chandigarh admn faces High Court's ire over Sector 26 sabzi market mess

Less than two months after taking suo motu cognisance of the deplorable conditions prevailing in Chandigarh’s Sector 26 fruit and vegetable market, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday questioned why civic authorities act only when compelled by judicial orders and not on their own.

“Why does everybody act only when there is a judicial order? Why not earlier? What action have you taken against inactive functionaries?”

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu asked while dictating the order in open court. The Bench directed the UT administration to file an additional affidavit disclosing not only the remedial measures undertaken so far but also the action initiated against officials who failed to discharge their municipal functions.

The Bench, which had taken suo motu notice of a Tribune report exposing the dilapidated and unsanitary state of the mandi, asserted that the petition would remain pending as several issues had not been addressed.

These included damaged and unrepaired platforms, streets meant for prospective buyers not being cleared or cleaned, and other long-standing deficiencies.

The affidavit to be filed must also explain “why municipal functions are performed only when a judicial order is passed and not otherwise,” the Bench added.

The matter will now be taken up in October after the UT administration places its compliance and accountability report on record.

The case has its genesis in a news report carried in these columns on the stinking garbage heaps, muddy roads, and encroachments in the Sector 26 fruit and vegetable mandi. The report had, among other things, mentioned that sanitation had remained in a poor state over the years despite the Administration’s tall claims.

The report had quoted a regular visitor as saying that the stench of the garbage was severe during the monsoon and extra efforts were required to ensure cleanliness.

Taking suo motu cognizance of the matter, the Bench had sought an affidavit from the UT Administration.

"Why are you permitting total anarchy in Sabzi Mandi?" the Bench had also asked the administration during the course of the hearing. The court had asserted that it had taken cognisance of the “disorderly fashion in which the vegetable and fruit market is being allowed to be run by the Union Territory, Chandigarh, Administration, in Sector 26, Chandigarh”.

The Bench had then also taken note of UT Additional Standing Counsel Aman Pal’s submission on instructions from UT Agriculture Marketing Board SDO that a decision had been taken to shift the vegetable and fruit market to Sector 39, Chandigarh, but the process of e-auction of allotment of shops had been stayed by the Apex Court in an SLP.