Chandigarh, Sept 18 — The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday sharply criticized the Chandigarh Administration for failing to maintain even basic facilities at the Sector 26 fruit and vegetable market, where filth, congestion, and poor access have persisted for years.
Hearing a suo motu case, Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry asked the Administration to clarify why vendors and consumers were left struggling in unhygienic conditions, despite the proposed relocation of the mandi to Sector 39 remaining tied up in litigation.
“Have you seen the muck that is there? You cannot even step into that market,” Chief Justice Nagu remarked in open court. The observation followed a submission by the UT counsel that the Supreme Court had stayed the e-auction of shops at the new site in Sector 39 earlier this year.
The counsel further argued that sanitation and upkeep were the responsibility of a private contractor engaged by the Market Committee. He added that illegal structures had been demolished in August, while new security and cleaning agencies were brought in to manage operations.
The Bench, however, made it clear that the proceedings before the Supreme Court did not absolve the Administration of its duty to maintain hygiene and accessibility at the existing market. “It does not prevent you from making some temporary arrangement for the general public at large,” the Chief Justice said, directing that photographs be produced to assess whether any improvement had been made.
The court’s intervention traces back to a news report highlighting stinking garbage, encroachments, and broken infrastructure in the mandi. The report, published earlier this year, quoted a frequent visitor who described how the stench worsened during monsoon and said additional efforts were required to keep the market usable.
Taking cognisance of the report, the Bench had earlier sought an affidavit from the UT Administration and questioned why “total anarchy” was being allowed in the mandi. The judges noted that the market was being run in a “dis-ordinary fashion,” contrary to public expectations of basic civic management.
During past hearings, UT Additional Standing Counsel Aman Pal had informed the Bench that the Administration, on the recommendation of the Agriculture Marketing Board, had decided to shift the mandi to Sector 39. However, the Supreme Court’s stay on the auction process stalled further movement on the plan.
With conditions at Sector 26 continuing to draw criticism, the High Court signaled it expected immediate, practical solutions rather than prolonged excuses.