The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday directed the state to file an affidavit on relief and rehabilitation measures for flood victims, but only after six weeks, when the ongoing flood crisis is expected to subside.
The decision came while hearing a batch of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) seeking minimum standards of aid under Section 12 of the Disaster Management Act, including food, potable water, sanitation, shelter, lighting, and medical care.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry said that immediate disaster management efforts should not be obstructed by legal proceedings.
Also Read: With 48 dead in Punjab floods, PM Modi's visit tomorrow; Army, NDTF frontline relief ops | 5 points
“The court made an earnest request to the petitioners to hold their hands till the crisis is over, but the petitioners insist that notice be issued. Instead of issuing notice, the court directs that the state file an affidavit, but only after the crisis of the flood situation is over. File after six weeks,” Live Law quoted the bench as saying.
The judges said the petitioners’ demands could hinder ongoing relief efforts, as officials would be diverted from disaster management to prepare replies, the report added.
{{/usCountry}}The judges said the petitioners’ demands could hinder ongoing relief efforts, as officials would be diverted from disaster management to prepare replies, the report added.
{{/usCountry}}“Disaster relief teams are there, the Army is there, everybody is working hard. Please don’t cause any obstruction. The moment we issue a notice, some people will be pulled out of disaster management and made to sit at a table to prepare a reply for these petitions,” said judges.
Also Read: Punjab govt’s ‘negligence’ worsened flood situation in state: BBMB chief
Chief Justice Nagu further remarked, “You all even doubt the efforts of the Army, which is there. They are present in every district. We will ask for a response because of your insistence. In the crisis time, there is something else that is required. It is surprising that none of you is coming forward and saying, please defer it.”
The bench added that the Supreme Court had already taken cognisance of similar issues in the case of Anamika Rana (supra) on September 4, which highlighted environmental degradation in the Himalayan region.
“We have seen unprecedented landslides and floods in Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, and Punjab. From media reports, it is noticed that a huge number of timber logs were flowing in the floodwaters. Prima facie, it appears that illegal tree felling has been taking place across the hills,” the high court cited.
The petitioners had sought immediate notice to the State for a formal reply, arguing that the flood situation, particularly in Punjab, is partly “man-made” and requires urgent legal attention.
Counsel Gurmohan Preet submitted comparative data from the 1988 floods, which affected 9,000 villages, highlighting similarities with the current crisis.