HC directs Madurai Corporation to repair damaged roads, relay new ones in a phased manner
A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete observed, 'Providing drinking water, pure air and infrastructure facilities are the constitutional mandate for the State. The right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution extends to the provision of these basic amenities and it must be protected by the State and its authorities'.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation petition filed in 2021 by advocate S. Suresh Kumar Isaac Paul of Madurai who had sought a direction to the State and Madurai Corporation to lay new roads after scrapping the existing roads, take necessary steps to maintain the drainage system, lay pavement and install information boards displaying the details of the road project in order to maintain transparency. Due to the damaged roads, the residents and the road users were suffering, the petitioner said.
The court observed that the Corporation was expected to provide basic amenities and infrastructure facilities to the residents of Madurai city. Roads are to be laid properly to prevent accidents and to ensure smooth traffic flow. Areas which require immediate attention are to be identified and roads which are damaged are to be repaired immediately. New roads are to be laid in a phased manner according to the budget allocations.
While laying new roads, the existing roads are to be milled in order to avoid inconvenience to the residents and the road users, in order to maintain roads at the existing level. The authorities should act in a swift manner to redress the grievances of the people residing in Madurai city in a phased manner by using technological advancement, the court observed.
Madurai Corporation, in a counter affidavit, told the court that the Corporation was taking effective steps to ensure quality roads. The court disposed of the petition.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
34 minutes ago
- Hans India
100 MPs have signed
New Delhi: Over100 MPs have signed their consent to bring an impeachment motion in Parliament against Justice Yashwant Varma, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said, a day before the monsoon session begins. The judge hit headlines when a huge sum of unaccounted cash was recovered from his Delhi home after a fire in March. The cash recovery triggered allegations of massive corruption within the Judiciary, prompting the Supreme Court to start an inquiry. A three-member panel has recommended his impeachment, and the judge has challenged this in the top court. The cash recovery row has also played out against the backdrop of some voices in the ruling dispensation accusing the Supreme Court of judicial overreach and stressing the supremacy of Parliament. According to the Constitution, a Supreme Court judge can be removed from office only through a Presidential order on the grounds of "proved misbehaviour or incapacity". A motion for impeachment in such a case will be admitted only if it has the support of at least 50 members in the Rajya Sabha or at least 100 in the Lok Sabha. This motion would need the support of two-thirds of the MPs in the House for passage. Earlier, Rijiju said corruption in the judiciary is an "extremely sensitive" matter and all political parties are united on this issue. "The government will bring an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma in this session," he said. Main Opposition Congress, sources have said, has also joined cause with the ruling BJP on this front. About 35 Lok Sabha MPs, including Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, have signed the proposal to bring the impeachment motion against the judge, the sources added.
News18
37 minutes ago
- News18
Parliament Gears Up for Stormy Monsoon Session As Debates Loom Over Op Sindoor, Electoral Roll
Last Updated: Parliament will also consider resolution seeking approval for extension of President's Rule in Manipur, which was imposed on February 13, under Article 356(1) of the Constitution. The Monsoon Session of Parliament kicks off today, July 21, amid heightened political tension, as the Opposition's INDIA bloc prepares to launch a scathing attack on the Narendra Modi-led government. Key flashpoints include the recent cross-border military operation, Operation Sindoor, and pressing domestic issues such as electoral roll revisions in Bihar. This marks the first parliamentary session following Operation Sindoor, India's precision military response to terror camps in Pakistan. The operation was carried out after the devastating April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians, mostly tourists. The Opposition is expected to demand a detailed explanation from the Prime Minister on the military action and its broader implications. Session Timeline The session is scheduled to run until August 21, 2025, with a planned adjournment from August 12 to 17 to accommodate Independence Day celebrations. In total, there will be 21 sittings over the span of 32 days. Legislative Agenda: 15 Bills on the Table Income Tax Bill, 2025 – Introduced in February and currently under review by a Joint Parliamentary Committee chaired by BJP MP Baijayant Panda. Manipur Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – To update the 2017 state-specific GST Act. Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – Seeks to revise existing tax frameworks. Indian Institutes of Management (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – Aims to include IIM Guwahati under the IIM Act, 2017. Additional maritime and infrastructure bills, such as the Coastal Shipping Bill, Merchant Shipping Bill, and Indian Ports Bill, as well as legal and cultural preservation bills like the Geoheritage Sites and Geo-relics Bill and Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Goa Bill. Also expected is financial business related to Demands for Grants for Manipur (2025–26) and the accompanying Appropriation Bill. Opposition Demands PM's Direct Response The INDIA bloc is insisting that Prime Minister Modi personally address Parliament regarding Operation Sindoor. In addition, they have raised concerns over former US President Donald Trump's recent claims about brokering peace between India and Pakistan, calling for an official clarification. The Opposition also plans to spotlight the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, alleging irregularities and voter deletions. Congress MP and Deputy Leader in Rajya Sabha, Pramod Tiwari, stressed the need for Modi's accountability. 'Parliament is more important than travelling abroad," he said, referencing the Prime Minister's upcoming visit to the UK and Maldives from July 23 to 26. Key Topics Expected To Dominate Debates Beyond military and electoral concerns, the Opposition aims to bring up: Restoration of full statehood to Jammu and Kashmir. The April Pahalgam terror attack. Alleged irregularities in the Bihar voter revision process. Kiren Rijiju has maintained that while the government is open to discussions on any issue — including Operation Sindoor — debates must adhere to established rules and procedures. Final decisions on the schedule and content of discussions will be made by the Business Advisory Committees of both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. President's Rule in Manipur Parliament will also consider a resolution seeking approval for the extension of President's Rule in Manipur, which was imposed on February 13, 2025, under Article 356(1) of the Constitution. Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
India Today
3 hours ago
- India Today
Justice Varma plea 'irrelevant' amid impeachment motion, say legal experts
Justice Yashwant Varma's petition challenging the findings of the Supreme Court's inquiry committee has been labelled "irrelevant" by legal experts, after Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju revealed that over 100 MPs have already signed a notice to the Speaker in connection with the cash discovery row — the requisite number to move an impeachment motion against a sitting judge in the Lok impending impeachment motion in the Monsoon Session of Parliament is expected to take priority over judicial proceedings, legal experts told India Today TV. Former judges and senior advocates highlighted the procedural precedence of a parliamentary inquiry in such matters."No one can interfere in a parliamentary inquiry," Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave told India Today TV, highlighting the distinct separation of powers mentioned in the Constitution. He further emphasised that "Parliament and court matters operate in different spheres," suggesting that the Supreme Court is unlikely to intervene at this stage. After the Supreme Court's in-house committee recommended Justice Varma's removal following its probe, the focus now shifts to the Lok Sabha, where an impeachment motion for his removal is set to be introduced."When the judge admits that money was found in his house, the rest becomes irrelevant," said a legal expert, indicating that the parliamentary inquiry will centre on these admissions. Despite this, Justice Varma "has the right to be heard by the Parliament Inquiry Committee," which could potentially clear his the impeachment process in Parliament, retired Justice Siddharth Mridul told India Today TV, "If there is an impeachment motion, that motion and the committee that is appointed to conduct an inquiry clearly provide all the steps that need to be followed. The impeachment motion process is to take action against a judge who refuses to resign."Justice Mridul pointed out that the in-house inquiry committee's findings are akin to a preliminary probe report, meant "to satisfy the CJI that there is cause to investigate the judge."Meanwhile, legal experts questioned the reasoning behind Varma's approach to the Supreme Court, with one stating, "I don't see why this petition has come to court. If the judge wants to clear his name, he has to go through the procedure provided by the Constitution."Dave found it "inconceivable for the Supreme Court to interfere in Parliament's inquiry process at such an early stage." Emphasising that there is no connection between an in-house inquiry and a parliamentary inquiry, Dave said, "MPs could have initiated impeachment based on the video that surfaced."Serious questions have been raised regarding police conduct in the case. Observers noted "serious, gross lapses by the police" and asked, "Why was the money allowed to disappear?"advertisement"Corruption is rampant in Judiciary -- nobody wants to publicly discuss it," said Dave, pointing to the need for systemic the impeachment process unfolds, the potential consequences are significant. "If Parliament's committee gives a clean chit, then that will be final," Dave said, highlighting the ultimate authority of Parliament in judicial impeachment matters. The decision now rests with Parliament, said legal experts, with Justice Mridul saying the in-house panel report is now "irrelevant" as only Parliament, and not the courts, can decide the fate of judges.- EndsMust Watch
