Uttarakhand High Court Summons Officials Over Safety Risks of Aging Canal Bridges
CMS Admin | May 19, 2025, 13:27 IST
The Uttarakhand high court has called the chief secretary and public works department secretary to discuss the risk of heavy vehicles using old canal bridges from 1965. These bridges are at risk of collapse. Currently, there is a ban on heavy vehicles, but financial losses and the lack of alternative routes are concerns. Petitioner Negi suggests an existing alternative route.
The Uttarakhand High Court has summoned state officials to address the safety of aging canal bridges used by heavy vehicles. A public interest litigation (PIL) prompted the court's action, citing the risk of collapse due to these bridges exceeding their load capacity. The chief secretary and the public works department secretary are to appear via video conferencing on Wednesday. The petitioner, Raghunath Singh Negi, warns of potential disaster if heavy vehicle traffic continues on these structures.
The High Court bench, comprising Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari, termed the situation "critical". They acknowledged the concerns raised by Negi regarding the bridges built over canals from the Aasan Barrage in Dehradun. Negi's PIL contends these 1965-era bridges are now dangerously overburdened.
“The state govt has neither repaired nor replaced these bridges, which have exceeded their designed lifespan and are at risk of collapse. Allowing heavy vehicles to use them would be dangerous,” Negi said.
![Canal Bridges Need Urgent Repair]()
Originally designed for light traffic, the bridges have borne the weight of heavy vehicles for years, particularly due to state-authorized mining operations. This continuous heavy usage has significantly compromised the structural integrity of the bridges, according to the PIL. Independent survey agencies have also expressed safety concerns and withheld approval for heavy vehicle operations on these bridges.
The state government admitted to the court that a ban on heavy vehicles using these bridges currently exists. However, it argued for reconsidering the ban due to the financial implications for vehicle owners and the perceived lack of alternative routes.
“A catastrophic incident could occur at any time unless heavy vehicles are prohibited and restoration work is undertaken immediately,” Negi added.
Negi countered the state's argument by pointing out an existing alternative route located approximately 15-16 km away. He stated that vehicle owners choose to ignore this alternative to minimize fuel expenses. He stressed the urgency of the situation and implored the court to intervene swiftly to prevent a potential disaster. He urges immediate action to prevent potential collapse and ensure public safety. The hearing is scheduled to resume on Wednesday. The court's decision is anticipated to significantly impact the safety of commuters and the future of these aging bridges.
The High Court bench, comprising Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari, termed the situation "critical". They acknowledged the concerns raised by Negi regarding the bridges built over canals from the Aasan Barrage in Dehradun. Negi's PIL contends these 1965-era bridges are now dangerously overburdened.
“The state govt has neither repaired nor replaced these bridges, which have exceeded their designed lifespan and are at risk of collapse. Allowing heavy vehicles to use them would be dangerous,” Negi said.
Canal Bridges Need Urgent Repair
Originally designed for light traffic, the bridges have borne the weight of heavy vehicles for years, particularly due to state-authorized mining operations. This continuous heavy usage has significantly compromised the structural integrity of the bridges, according to the PIL. Independent survey agencies have also expressed safety concerns and withheld approval for heavy vehicle operations on these bridges.
The state government admitted to the court that a ban on heavy vehicles using these bridges currently exists. However, it argued for reconsidering the ban due to the financial implications for vehicle owners and the perceived lack of alternative routes.
“A catastrophic incident could occur at any time unless heavy vehicles are prohibited and restoration work is undertaken immediately,” Negi added.
Negi countered the state's argument by pointing out an existing alternative route located approximately 15-16 km away. He stated that vehicle owners choose to ignore this alternative to minimize fuel expenses. He stressed the urgency of the situation and implored the court to intervene swiftly to prevent a potential disaster. He urges immediate action to prevent potential collapse and ensure public safety. The hearing is scheduled to resume on Wednesday. The court's decision is anticipated to significantly impact the safety of commuters and the future of these aging bridges.