Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Thursday, October 31, 2024

Mosquito Breeding: Delhi HC Calls For Increased Fines At Rs 50K And Says Mere Challaning Would Only Lead To Explosion Of Court Cases

Posted in: Civil Laws
Sun, May 29, 22, 19:32, 2 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 4558
On Its Own Motion vs State that the quantum of fine should not be limited to Rs 5,000 but should be fixed at Rs 50,000.

In a precise, practical, pragmatic and powerful judgment titled Court On Its Own Motion vs State in W.P. (C) 5569/2021 and W.P. (C) 14790/2021 pronounced as recently as on May 20, 2022, the Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi Government to seriously examine the proposal of imposition of fines for those found guilty of mosquito breeding observing that the quantum of fine should not be limited to Rs 5,000 but should be fixed at Rs 50,000. The Division Bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh was of the firm view that the imposition of fines should be examined if a deterrence has to be created in the minds of the people to not allow mosquito breeding in their premises. It must be mentioned here that the Bench had taken suo motu cognizance of the issue of large scale mosquito breeding in the city, resulting in vector borne diseases such as malaria, chikungunya and dengue every year.

To start with, this notable judgment by a Division Bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh sets the pitch in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
Mr. Aneja, the learned Amicus has carried out the activity requested of him vide order dated 25.03.2022. After interacting with the officials of the local bodies, he has suggested that the Deputy Health Officer (DHO), who is a qualified MD/ MBBS doctor, for each zone he heads, should be made the officer responsible for enforcement of the common protocol which has been evolved by the Municipal Corporations and other local bodies and authorities in terms of earlier orders. Similarly, for the NDMC and the Delhi Cantonment Board areas, the corresponding officers, namely the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) for NDMC, and the Assistant Health Officer for the Delhi Cantonment Board should be made responsible."

Frankly speaking, the Bench then observes in para 2 that:
The overall responsibility to supervise implementation of the common protocol, it goes without saying, should rest with the Municipal Commissioner who shall, in co-ordination with the DHOs ensure that the protocol evolved is strictly implemented. We direct that the DHOs in the Municipal Corporations; the CMO in NDMC, and; Assistant Health Officer (AHO) in Delhi Cantonment Board shall be personally responsible to implement the common protocol. The Commissioner of the MCD and the Chief Executive Officer of the NDMC and DCB shall be personally responsible to supervise the working of the DHOs, CMO and AHO respectively. Failure to perform their duties by the aforesaid officers shall invite departmental action, as well as for Contempt of Court both individually and jointly."

As we see, the Bench then mentions in para 3 that:
The common protocol has been placed on record by all the 3 Corporations. Mr. Pande, who appears for the SDMC has referred to the same. Mr. Aneja has also examined the same and his only comment is that the remaining concern is with regard to its actual implementation on the ground."

Without mincing any words, the Bench then states in para 4 that:
Mr. Pande does not dispute the fact that the ultimate responsibility for prevention of mosquito infestation rests with the Municipal Corporations. He, however, submits that the other local bodies and authorities noticed by us in these proceedings, who have also agreed to the common protocol, should equally cooperate. We direct all the local bodies/ authorities/ departments to strictly comply with, and fulfil their respective obligations as enlisted in the common protocol, which has been evolved in consultation with them and with their consent. They shall all remain bound by the said common protocol. Failure to comply with the same, and lapses in implementation of the common protocol shall be viewed seriously, and the Chief Executive Officers of the other local bodies/ authorities shall be personally held liable for the same."

Of course, the Bench then notes in para 5 that:
Ms. Popli, who appears for the Delhi Jal Board undertakes to place before this Court, the calendar of activities that the Delhi Jal Board shall undertake to prevent mosquito infestation, since the Delhi Jal Board is managing sewer drains and several water bodies which are also a source of mosquito breeding. Let the same be filed within 4 weeks along with an affidavit."

As it turned out, the Bench then specifies in para 6 that:
So far as the Irrigation and Flood Control Department of the Government of NCT of Delhi is concerned, Mr. Satyakam has drawn our attention to the tabulation placed on record with regard to the action taken on various aspects. The said Department shall also file on affidavit, the calendar of the activities that they would undertake round the year to prevent mosquito breeding. The same be also filed within 4 weeks."

To put things in perspective, the Bench then quite significantly seeks to point out in para 7 that:
On the aspect of imposition of fine, the stand of the NDMC is that they are mooting a proposal for raising the fine from Rs.500/- to Rs.50,000/-, and also imposition of on the spot fines. So far as the GNCTD is concerned, Mr. Satyakam submits that the proposal to increase the fine from Rs.500 to Rs.5,000/- is under process. We may take note of the fact that the Municipal Corporations had proposed enhancement of fine from Rs.500/- to Rs.50,000/- and also the imposition of on the spot fines. However, the proposal for increase has been limited to only Rs.5,000/-, and on the spot fines is not proposed at all. Mr. Aneja submits, and we entirely agree with him, that the efficacy of the system of imposition of fines as a deterrent would be completely lost, if fines are not imposed on the spot. We may also notice that mere challaning the violators and those found guilty of allowing mosquito breeding in their premises, would only lead to explosion of such cases in the Courts, and adding to the already existing heavy burdens that the subordinate Courts have to deal with."

Most significantly, the Bench then minces no words to unequivocally hold in para 8 that:
In our view, the GNCTD should seriously examine the proposal for imposition of fines – on the spot, if a deterrence has to be created in the minds of the people to not allow mosquito breeding in their premises. We are also of the view that where institutions are found guilty of such conduct, the quantum of fine should not be limited to merely Rs.5,000/-, and should be fixed at Rs. 50,000/-. The GNCTD shall examine these aspects at the highest level and respond on the next date."

Be it noted, the Bench then hastens to add in para 9 that:
Mr. Aneja also raised the issue that the Nodal Offices appointed by the public authorities, and the notices to whom notices have been issued by us, are low ranking officers in certain cases. This issue be examined by Mr. Aneja. The local body/ authority/ noticees shall provide a hierarchy of their organisation to Mr. Aneja within the next 2 weeks. We permit Mr. Aneja to place on record all such instances, and the same shall also be shared with the concerned local body/ authority/ noticees, and the said aspect shall be remedied by them before the next date of hearing."

It is worth noting that the Bench then holds in para 10 that:
Mr. Raja Singh submits that his suggestion to make it mandatory for installation of mosquito nets in buildings should be considered by the DDA. He has today tendered in Court, an application along with several annexures. A copy of the same has been served on the DDA in Court today. We direct the DDA to examine the same and respond to the suggestions made by Mr. Raja Singh before the next date of hearing. It shall be open to Mr. Raja Singh to obtain a complete copy of the digital record of the present proceedings from the Registry."

Furthermore, the Bench then directs in para 11 that:
A copy of this order be communicated electronically by the Registry to all the party noticed by us in these proceedings for strict compliance."

Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding in para 12 that:
List on 15.07.2022."

All said and done, it has to be conceded with grace that the Division Bench of Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh have most commendably taken the menace of mosquito breeding most seriously. It would be germane to note that the Division Bench of Delhi High Court has not refrained itself from calling on the Delhi Government to most seriously examine the laudable proposal of imposition of fines for those found guilty of mosquito breeding as it dangerously culminates in spreading of many vector borne diseases like dengue, chikungunya and malaria every year. Of course, the Court also very rightly reiterated that a strong deterrence of imposition of fine is definitely needed for people to abide by the law strictly and those found guilty of violating the law should not be left by mere challaning the violators as that would only lead to explosion of such cases in the Courts as we have been seeing also regrettably since last many years thus overburdening the subordinate Courts with huge cases of such kind! The Court also came to the ineluctable conclusion that where institutions are found guilty of such conduct then the fine should not be restricted to just Rs 5000 only but rather raised and fixed at Rs 50,000. Very rightly so! No denying or disputing it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi (Retd), A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Present space law framework in the country. Space has heightened the curiosity of mankind for centuries. Due to the advancement in technology, there is fierce competition amongst nations for the next space war.
The scope of Section 151 CPC has been explained by the Supreme Court in the case K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy
Co-operative Societies are governed by the Central Co-operative Societies Act 1912, where there is no State Act. In West Bengal they were governed by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act
Registration enables an NGO to be a transparent in its operations to the Government, Donors, to its members and to its urgent community.
The ingredients of Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are
Drafting of legal Agreements and Deeds in India
ST Land rules in India,West Bengal
The paper will discuss about the provisions related to liquidated damages. How the law has evolved. Difference between the provisions of England and India.
A privilege may not be a right, but, under the constitution of the country, I do not gather that any broad distinction is drawn between the rights and the privileges that were enjoyed and that were taken away.
It is most hurting to see that in India, the soldiers who hail from Jammu and Kashmir and who join forces either in Army or in CRPF or in BSF or in police or in any other forces against the will of majority
Pukhraj v/s State of Uttarakhand warned high caste priests very strongly against refusing to perform religious ceremonies on behalf of lower caste pilgrims. It took a very stern view of the still existing practice of exclusion of the SC/ST community in Haridwar.
This article aims to define delay in civil suits. It finds the general as well as specific causes leading to pendency of civil suits and over-burdening of courts. This articles suggests some solutions which are pragmatic as well as effective to reduce the burden of the courts and speed up the civil judicial process.
This article deals with importance, needs, highlights and provisions of the Surrogacy Bill 2016, which is passed by the lok sabha on 19th December 2018 .
Cross Examination In Case of Injunction Suits, Injunctions are governed by Sections 37, 38, 39 to Section 42 of Specific Relief Act.
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v Gujarat inability of a person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction..
Dr.Ashok Khemka V/s Haryana upheld the integrity of eminent IAS officer because of his upright and impeccable credentials has emerged as an eyesore for politicians of all hues but also very rightly expunged Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar adverse remarks in his Personal Appraisal Report
State of Rajasthan and others v. Mukesh Sharma has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 2006.
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Vs Kiran Kant Robinson the Supreme Court reiterated that, in a suit, the plaintiff is the dominus litis and cannot be forced to add parties against whom he does not want to fight unless there is a compulsion of the rule of law.
explicitly in a latest landmark ruling prohibited the use of loudspeakers in the territory without prior permission from the authorities.
The Commissioner of Police v/s Devender Anand held that filing of criminal complaint for settling a dispute of civil nature is abuse of process of law.
Rajasthan Vs Shiv Dayal High Court cannot dismiss a second appeal merely on the ground that there is a concurrent finding of two Courts (whether of dismissal or decreeing of the suit), and thus such finding becomes unassailable.
Complete Guide to Pleadings in India, get your Written statement and Plaint Drafted by highly qualified lawyers at reasonable rate.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava vs UP imposed absolute prohibition on use of DJs in the state and asked the state government to issue a toll-free number, dedicated to registering complaints against illegal use of loudspeakers. It will help control noise pollution to a very large extent if implemented in totality.
Rajasthan v/s Shri Ramesh Chandra Mundra that institutional independence, financial autonomy is integral to independence of judiciary. directing the Rajasthan Government to reconsider the two decade old proposal of the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to upgrade 16 posts of its Private Secretaries as Senior Private Secretaries
The Indian Contract act, 1872 necessities significant consideration in a few of its areas. One such area of the Indian Contract act of 1872 is where if any person finds a lost good belonging to others and takes them into his custody acts as the bailee to the owner of the good.
Government has notified 63 provisions of the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 including the ones dealing with enhanced penalties
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it. Whether succession to the property of a Goan situated outside Goa in India will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867
In a major legal setback to Pakistan, the High Court of England and Wales rejecting rightly Pakistan's frivolous claims and ruling explicitly that the VII Nizam of Hyderabad's descendants and India can collect 35 million pounds from Londons National Westminster Bank.
Power of Attorney and the Specific Relief Act, 1963
air pollution in Delhi and even adjoining regions like several districts of West UP are crossing all limits and this year even in districts adjoining Delhi like Meerut where air pollution was never felt so much as is now being felt.
Dr Syed Afzal (Dead) v/sRubina Syed Faizuddin that the Civil Courts while considering the application seeking interim mandatory injunction in long pending cases, should grant opportunity of hearing to the opposite side, interim mandatory injunctions can be granted after granting opportunity of hearing to the opposite side.
students of Banaras Hindu University's (BHU's) Sanskrit Vedvigyan Sankay (SVDVS) went on strike demanding the cancellation of the appointment of Assistant Professor Feroze Khan and transfer him to another faculty.
Odisha Development Corporation Ltd Vs. M/s Anupam Traders & Anr. the time tested maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit which in simple and straight language means that, No party should suffer due to the act of Court.
M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd v/s. State of U.P that no one can be inflicted with an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunity of hearing. In other words, the Apex Court reiterated the supreme importance of the legal maxim and latin phrase titled Audi alteram partem
Ram Murti Yadav v/s State of Uttar Pradesh the standard or yardstick for judging the conduct of the judicial officer has necessarily to be strict, that the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.
Judicial Officers Being Made Scapegoats And Penalized By Inconvenient Transfers And Otherwise: SC
Desh Raj v/s Balkishan that the mandatory time-line for filing written statement is not applicable to non-commercial suits. In non-commercial suits, the time-line for written statement is directory and not mandatory, the courts have the discretion to condone delay in filing of written statement in non-commercial suits.
M/S Granules India Ltd. Vs UOI State, as a litigant, cannot behave as a private litigant, and it has solemn and constitutional duty to assist the court in dispensation of justice.
To exercise one's own fundamental right to protest peacefully does not give anyone the unfettered right to block road under any circumstances thereby causing maximum inconvenience to others.
Today, you have numerous traffic laws as well as cases of traffic violations. People know about safe driving yet they end up defying the safety guidelines. It could be anything like driving while talking on the phone, hit and run incidents, or driving under the influence of alcohol.
The legal processes are uncertain. Also, there are times when justice gets denied, and the legal outcomes get delayed. Hence, nobody wants to see themselves or their loved one end up in jail.
Arun Kumar Gupta v/s Jharkhand that judicial officer's integrity must be of a higher order and even a single aberration is not permitted. The law pertaining to the vital subject of compulsory retirement of judicial officers have thus been summed up in this noteworthy judgment.
Online Contracts or Digital Agreements are contracts created and signed over the internet. Also known as e-contracts or electronic contracts, these contracts are a more convenient and faster way of creating and signing contracts for individuals, institutions and corporate.
Re: Problems And Miseries Of Migrant Labourers has asked Maharashtra to be more vigilant and make concerted effort in identifying and sending stranded migrant workers to their native places.
Gerald Lynn Bostock v/s Clayton County, Georgia that employees cannot be fired from the jobs merely because of their transgender and homosexual identity.
This article compares two cases with similar facts, yet different outcomes and examines the reasons for the same. It revolves around consideration and validation of contracts.
Odisha Vikas Parishad vs Union Of India while modifying the absolute stay on conducting the Jagannath Rath Yatra at Puri has allowed it observing the strict restrictions and regulations of the Centre and the State Government.
Soni Beniwal v/s Uttarakhand even if there is a bar on certain matters to be taken as PIL, there is always discretion available with the Court to do so in exercise of its inherent powers.
Indian Contract Act was commenced in the year 1872 and since then, several deductions and additions have happened to the same. The following piece of work discusses about the concept of offer under the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Top