Madras high court directed the state to file a report on how the state highways department is

Madras high court directed the state to file a report on how the state highways department is ensuring the quality of laying of roads, as per the tender document

He was held responsible for the substandard quality of roads laid in six stretches of 198.135km of state highways and 360.272km of major district roads in Sivaganga district. The judge observed that it appears that a GO has been issued in 2010 to ensure the quality of the works by fixing some responsibility on the officials concerned. Madurai : Madras high court directed the state to file a report on how the state highways department is ensuring the quality of laying of roads, as per the tender documents. The court was hearing a petition filed by P Thavaneethi, a quality control assistant engineer (highways) of the Ramanathapuram division. Stating that he has been selectively targeted, the petitioner moved court challenging the charge memo issued against him. Justice B Pugalendhi observed that as a citizen, he is also travelling on highway roads, including the rural roads. Most of the roads do not withstand even two years. The court has also dealt with several cases on the allotment of road works by forming syndicates. Several thousand crores have been spent on laying roads. However, there is no proper mechanism to ensure the quality of execution of works. However, it appears that there is no implementation of this GO, fixing responsibilities on the first-, second- and third-level officers. The court is making this adverse inference considering the manner in which the reply has been filed by the joint secretary to the highways and minor ports department to the queries raised by the court regarding the disciplinary actions taken in the past five years.

Though the administrations have changed, it appears that the officers are protecting the wrongdoers by not initiating necessary action and by ensuring that the 2010 GO is not made available on the website. The judge also sought details of the number of disciplinary actions taken against the erring first, second and third-level officers in the past five years as per the 2010 GO. Therefore, the case of the petitioner that he has been selectively targeted needs to be addressed properly,” the judge observed.

“This sorry state of affairs is still continuing even after the change of government. Hence, the judge gave the direction to the state. The judge further asked whether a monitoring mechanism was followed or any GO or instructions were issued in this regard.