The Gujarat High Court has issued a notice to the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) and its officials within the town planning and estate department in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning the presence of hazardous hoardings across the city. This legal action seeks the removal of hoardings deemed dangerous to public safety, alleging violations of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act and the General Development Control Regulations (GDCR).
The PIL, filed by social worker Priya Sharma and represented by advocate Rohit Patel, underscores the AMC’s negligence in regulating the erection of these hoardings. Sharma’s petition highlights the potential risks these structures pose, especially during heavy rains and storms prevalent in the monsoon season. The petition points to hoardings mounted on unipoles and those installed on road dividers as particularly perilous.
The urgency of this matter is underscored by the recent tragedy in Ghatkopar, Mumbai, where the collapse of a hoarding resulted in 17 fatalities. This incident is cited in Sharma’s petition to emphasize the potential consequences of AMC’s alleged oversight. The PIL accuses AMC of irresponsibly permitting the installation of these hazardous hoardings on crossroads, building terraces, and high-rise structures, thereby endangering public safety.
The court’s notice, returnable on June 21, reflects a critical step towards addressing these safety concerns. The PIL argues that the AMC’s neglect disproportionately impacts the city’s residents, who dutifully pay their taxes and thus deserve protection from such man-made hazards. Sharma asserts that it is incumbent upon AMC officials to act responsibly and mitigate these risks to prevent future incidents.
In response to these allegations, the Gujarat High Court’s intervention aims to hold the AMC accountable for ensuring the safety and well-being of Ahmedabad’s citizens. The legal scrutiny not only seeks the removal of non-compliant hoardings but also urges the AMC to adopt more stringent measures in the approval and monitoring of such structures.
This case highlights a broader issue of urban management and public safety, drawing attention to the critical need for regulatory bodies to enforce safety standards rigorously. The outcome of this legal challenge could set a precedent for other municipalities in India, reinforcing the importance of proactive governance in safeguarding public infrastructure and ensuring community safety.
