GEC alumni team counters ‘misleading reports' on collapsed building
Several reports had suggested that the collapsed building had received a structural safety certificate from the GEC's Civil Engineering department, but documents and inspection records reviewed by the alumni reveal this claim as incorrect.
According to the team, the building had in fact been declared unsafe by a faculty member from the GEC on August 17, 2024 following a site inspection conducted in response to a request from the Thrissur Corporation.
The inspection was triggered by an incident the previous day, when glass panels from the first floor of the building shattered and fell, prompting the corporation to issue a formal letter requesting an urgent assessment.
The inspection report clearly stated that the building was not structurally sound, with supporting technical reasoning. Furthermore, on September 28, during a visit by a court-appointed advocate commission— based on a Kerala High Court order dated September 12 —the same GEC faculty member reiterated in person that the building was unsafe.
The team said the reports mistakenly referred to a safety certificate issued for the adjacent building that had been certified as safe on November 11. It was this certificate that had been misrepresented in public discourse.
The Government Engineering College, Thrissur, has long been authorised under the Kerala Building Rules to carry out structural assessments. Faculty members from the Civil Engineering department, especially those with postgraduate specialisation in structural engineering, have regularly served on expert panels formed by municipal bodies and even the Kerala High Court, the report says.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
9 hours ago
- The Hindu
Shipwreck: PIL filed before Kerala HC seeking environmental security deposit
Social activist and president of Kerala Fish Workers Coordination Committee and Swathanthra Matsya Thozhilali Union Charles George has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) before the Kerala High Court, seeking $134 million as environmental security deposit, citing, among others, the threat to marine biodiversity following the sinking on May 25 of a container vessel MSC ELSA 3, approximately 14.60 nautical miles off the Alappuzha coast. The vessel was carrying 643 containers, including 244 with hazardous and noxious substances, 58 with foreign waste, and over 450 metric tonnes of marine fuel. Despite the confirmed presence of this dangerous cargo, neither adequate wreck removal nor oil extraction has been carried out. In his petition, Mr. George said that one of the gravest concerns emerging from the sinking of the vessel was the apparent and deliberate misdeclaration or non-declaration of cargo, which not only violated Indian Customs laws and international maritime conventions but also posed significant risks to public safety, national security, and environmental integrity. The incident has in turn triggered catastrophic ecological, economic and legal consequences. The hazardous materials in the containers and bunker oil pose severe risks to Kerala's marine biodiversity, particularly during the monsoon fish spawning season. Oil sardines, a vital source of income for Kerala's coastal fishermen, are at risk of extinction due to this maritime disaster. The incident has exposed glaring regulatory failures — cargo misdeclaration, lack of advanced container scanning at ports, insufficient port State control (PSC) measures, and a disturbing attempt to evade liability through corporate structuring. This has also made arrest under the Admiralty Act ineffective, necessitating urgent judicial directions to secure $134 million as environmental security deposit before the court as interim security for environmental and economic damage, Mr. George said in his petition. Through this PIL, he sought urgent and comprehensive relief to mitigate the environmental, legal and economic fallout of the ship sinking incident. He also sought a direction to arrest any MSC vessel within India's Admiralty jurisdiction to secure maritime claims and a direction for an immediate and independent investigation into the gross cargo misdeclaration, an order mandating the installation of advanced scanning, detection and verification infrastructure at all Indian ports and a time-bound, court-monitored wreck removal and environmental remediation operation.
The Hindu
10 hours ago
- The Hindu
HC orders removal of man's photo from rowdy list gallery
The Kerala High Court has ordered the removal of the photo of a person from the rowdy list gallery at the Fort Kochi police station within two weeks, saying that 'once a rowdy, need not always be a rowdy'. 'Reformation is the main goal of Indian criminal jurisprudence. Economic hardship and many other factors could lead to one's involvement in crimes. No person is born a criminal. An opportunity must be given to reform himself,' Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan said, while hearing a petition by Nixon of Fort Kochi. Mr. Nixon's counsel contended that his circle of friends led him to get involved in criminal cases till eight years ago, and that he was acquitted in almost all pending cases. He now leads a quiet life with family and is a God-fearing man, working as a supervisor in the building contract works of his brother. His photo with his name beneath exhibited in the rowdy list gallery at the station would even affect his marriage prospects. Opposing the petition, the public prosecutor said that the petitioner had been involved in many cases, including serious ones, for 13 years since 2004. He was also in constant touch with people engaged in criminal activities, and there was a need for surveillance to make him desist from involvement in criminal activities, he contended.
The Hindu
13 hours ago
- The Hindu
Register FIR in complaints sent from abroad if they are about cognizable offences, Kerala HC tells police
The police cannot refuse to register an FIR in a complaint sent by email from abroad if it is about a cognizable offence, the Kerala High Court has said. Justice Kauser Edappagath issued the ruling while considering a petition filed by a Non-Resident Indian woman residing in Australia. The petitioner approached the court alleging that the Muttom police did not act on a complaint against her husband she had sent by email in 2020 to the then State Police Chief (SPC) though the SPC had forwarded it to the jurisdictional police station for necessary action. She added that the local police declined to register an FIR citing that the complaint was unsigned, it was submitted through email and that the petitioner's physical presence could not be ensured due to her residence abroad. Sans territorial limitations The court observed that the concept of Zero FIR was introduced to ensure that victims are able to file complaints, irrespective of territorial limitations. Thus, an FIR should be registered if the complaint was about a cognizable offence, even if it was sent from abroad. Subsequently, the court directed the police to act on the petitioner's complaint by following the procedure prescribed under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), particularly Section 173 (Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, irrespective of the area where the offence is committed, may be given orally or by electronic communication to an officer in charge of a police station).
