Take Claims Of Structural Defects In Pune Metro Seriously: Bombay HC To MMRC

The Bombay High Court has recently informed the Maharashtra Metro Rail Corporation (MMRC) that claims and allegations about structural defects with the Pune metro rail should be taken seriously.

The project, according to a division bench of acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep Marne, is in the nature of public infrastructure, affecting citizens’ lives and safety.

“In matters of public project of this nature, there may not be laxity on the part of any of the stake holders and the persons manning the project,” the bench stated.

A technical institute in Pune assured the Court that a new structural audit of the Pune metro will be conducted.

The division bench then dismissed the public interest litigation (PIL) petition, which complained about visible flaws in the structure.

The petition was filed by Narayan Kochak and Shirish Khabardar, structural engineers, seeking a court-monitored investigation into the quality of construction and structural safety of the superstructure of the Pune metro project’s metro stations.

Kochak had observed gross negligence and lapses in metro Line 2 construction, which could endanger public life and safety.

Appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Advocate Pratik Rajopadhye informed the bench that the project’s negligence would affect not only commuters in the metro, but also passersby and pedestrians below the metro line.

The MMRC counsel argued that the structure had received a structural stability certificate and that the PIL was frivolous.

It was also claimed that the College Of Engineering, Pune (COEP) technical university in Pune had carried out a structural audit and that the structures were safe.

Justice Marne noted that the MMRC was proceeding on the assumption that the structures were safe, but that scientific evidence would be required to make a scientific claim.

The counsel for COEP then informed the Court that the university will form a new committee to conduct structural audits and submit a report.

Satisfied with this submission, the Court directed MMRC and COEP to take the claims of such flaws seriously before dismissing the petition.

The bench ordered COEP to submit its report within 7 days of conducting an audit.

It also asked MMRC to upload the report on its website.

The division also allowed the petitioners to re-apply if they were dissatisfied with the report.