PIL/18/2017 of S (O) PAKPI DEVI Vs STATE OF MANIPUR on 21 December 2017

PIL NO.18 of 2017

21.12.2017

BEFORE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KH.NOBIN SINGH

Heard Mr.M.Rakesh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. N.Kumarjit, learned AG assisted by Mr.Tamphamani, learned counsel for the State respondents. Heard also Mr. H.S.Paonam, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.N. Bipin, learned counsel for the respondent NO.3.

The present PIL has been filed seeking alteration of the public toilet being constructed by the respondent No.3 on the ground that such construction would make the access to the market difficult by narrowing the passage.

We do not wish to go into the various averments made by the respective parties in their affidavits, in view of the averment made by the State respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition filed on 13.10.2017 to the effect that there is no issue of lessoning the width of the access as sufficient space has been provided as clearly mentioned in Para No.4 of the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the State respondents, which is reproduced hereinbelow:- “4. That with reference to para No.4 of the writ petition under reply deponent respectfully submits that there are 3(three) approach roads/entrance ways into the Mayang Imphal main Market. The northern side approach road has a width of 17 ft. The middle approach road equally has a width of 17 ft. in between the 2(two) Market Blocks i.e. the Northern and Southern Block of Emoinu Shopping Complex. The third approach road is situated at the southernmost part of the market just to the adjacent south of Emoinu Shopping Complex. The width of this approach road on the eastern side (the narrowest part) is 4.9 m or 16.2 ft. But in the western side the width of this approach road is 13.8m or 45 ft. The Mayang Imphal Municipal Council preserved an entranceway of 18 ft. at the proposed site for construction of the Public Toilet. Mayang Imphal Municipal is also going to construct a Brick Wall fencing in between the approach road and the Public Toilet complex to avoid any inconvenience and also to protect the Public Toilet. The said area is/was not used for parking for the last many years. It is further submitted that the Mayang Imphal Motor Road Transport Cooperative society has its own parking area at their own Patta land. Further for light passenger vehicles such as Autos, Tata Magics, Vans, etc., the Mayang Imphal Municipal Council has already provided for parking in front of the Emoinu Shopping Complex as well as nearby Multipurpose Hall, Mayang Imphal Bazar. There is no problem for using all these 3(three) approach roads for entrance of heavy vehicle or free movement of fire tender vehicles.”

Mr.Rakesh, learned counsel for the petitioner also fairly submits that if the State Government are going to maintain the space as provided in para No.4 above, he may not have any grievance . However, he is apprehensive that though it may be so stated in the affidavit-in-opposition , on actual ground, where the construction is going on, there will be much less space than what has been stated in the affidavit-in-opposition.

Learned AG however submits that there is no question of making any construction beyond what is provided in the para No.4 above.

Considering the submissions made by the learned AG for the State respondents as mentioned in Para No.4 of the affidavit-in-opposition, we are of the view that there may not be any need to consider this matter as the State respondents/ authorities have undertaken before this Court to construct/make necessary constructions by providing the space as mentioned above in para No.4 of the affidavit-in-opposition. Mr.Rakesh, however, submits that if adequate space as mentioned in para No.4 above is not provided, he may be permitted to approach this Court again.

He may do so.

With the above observations, the present PIL stands closed. Earlier interim order, if any, stands vacated.

JUDGE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Opendro(rt)