Chennai
A division bench comprising Justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha, before whom a public interest litigation (PIL) moved came up on Thursday, also sought to know whether the compound wall said to be 20-foot high was permissible as per the prevailing rules.
Further, the bench while seeking details regarding the officials who had failed to act despite complaints of the wall being in a dilapidated condition, directed the petitioner to include them as well as the house owner as respondents in the case. Also, seeking the petitioner to come up with precise details as to on whose land the wall was built, the bench adjourned the case to January 24.
The petitioner had submitted that the house owner Sivasubramaniam had built the 20-foot-high wall in a bid to shield himself and his family from the Scheduled Caste community people who were living nearby.
However, despite several complaints about the wall becoming weak, neither the house owner nor the government authorities had acted, resulting in 17 lives being lost, he contended.
Based on this, the petitioner sought the court for a direction to register a case against the house owner as per the SC/ST Act and initiate action against the government officials.
He also sought for a direction to demolish all such “untouchability walls” standing in Tamil Nadu.
Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!
Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!
Click here for iOS
Click here for Android