NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court has taken a grim view of the failure of civic agencies to keep a shopping complex in east Delhi free of biomedical/hazardous waste.
Justice Najmi Waziri recently slapped a cost on DDA and summoned its director to appear and explain why a proper action taken report was not submitted, giving details of steps taken to clean the complex, which falls in a residential area.
“The affidavit on behalf of the DDA director has not been filed. Let the commissioner, DDA look into the matter. An affidavit must be filed subject to the payment of the cost of Rs 5,000 is to be paid in the AASRA Fund created by this court within two weeks. Director of DDA shall be present in the court on the next date. In the interim, EDMC shall ensure that the premises are cleaned up within a week,” justice Waziri observed while hearing a plea by local residents.
The court’s directive came after DDA claimed that the plot of land was auctioned by it to a private party who has developed a shopping complex and its maintenance is the responsibility of the developer, while the sanitation and cleanliness, etc. is the job of East Delhi Municipal Corporation.
In response, EDMC told the court that the municipality can’t be held liable since the complex has been developed by DDA or at its behest. But the court was not convinced by passing the buck between the two agencies and ordered both to ensure that “the market-place is kept clean and up to the prescribed hygienic standard.”
The plea filed by three residents sought the court’s intervention, alleging that DDA and EDMC have allowed illegal and unauthorised activity in the market complex by a veterinary hospital under the garb of a pet care clinic, leading to imminent danger and hazardous environmental concerns to those living in the vicinity.
However, the vet, Dr Gautam Unny, strongly rejected the allegation and told the court that even he wants to have the neighbourhood of the clinic clean. Advocate Bharat S Kumar, representing the vet, assured the court that the clinic staff would never throw garbage, medical waste, etc. This would make the place unhygienic and the staff undertook to dispose of the waste at the designated place.
Kumar also argued that no contagious disease can ever spread from a dog or a cat in any case, adding that the petitioners are silent on the presence of many other medical stores and pharma companies in the area, who generate medical waste and medical packaging waste. The court will continue hearing the matter next year.
