The Gujarat high court on Monday took suo motu cognizance of the Morbi suspension bridge collapse in which 135 people were killed on October 30. The court issued notices to the state authorities, the Morbi district administration, the municipality and the State Human Rights Commission and sought reports on the accident by November 14.
As the high court commenced regular functioning after the Diwali vacation, a two-minute silence was observed for the victims of the bridge tragedy. After that, the bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh Shastri told advocate general Kamal Trivedi, who was present in the courtroom, that the court has taken suo motu cognizance of the tragedy. “But for the vacation, we would have sat on the very same day. It is very disheartening that we are starting the New Year with this, but we want some action on your end,” the CJ said. To this, the advocate general submitted that the government has taken a couple of steps and he would highlight them in his submissions.
The court impleaded six parties as respondents in this case - the state government through the chief secretary, the state home department, commissioners of municipalities, the chief officer of Morbi municipality, Morbi district collector and the human rights commission. The judges sought a status report from the chief secretary and the home secretary. It has also sought a report from the human rights commission and ordered the notice be sent through a special messenger to the commissioner and ordered it to file a report on the accident.
Only cosmetic repair work
On October 24, Oreva Group chairman Jaysukh Patel had announced that the suspension bridge would be reopened to the public on Gujarati New Year on October 26 after ‘full and final’ renovation spanning six months. But police investigation into the bridge collapse, which exposed the shoddy renovation work, revealed that the group had spent only Rs 12,00,000, or 6% of the total £200,000 committed towards revamping the 145-year-old bridge. The company had signed a15-year maintenance and operation contract which included providing security at the bridge.
The revelation is in tune with FSL findings that no major strengthening work was undertaken at the bridge which collapsed on October 30, killing 135. The renovation work was subcontracted to Dhrangadhra-based firm DevPrakash Solutions which has now been found to lack any expertise for such work. The meagre spending details have been obtained from the documents seized from DevPrakash Solutions.
Sources close to the investigation said that only some painting, greasing and other superficial works were carried out instead of actually strengthening the structure, changing the rusted cables and others.
Apparently, neither Oreva submitted any break-up of the £200,000 estimate nor the civic body asked for it. Patel had even bragged that the renovated bridge would sustain for 15 years and said specialized equipment with modified technical specifications procured from leading companies was used.
