Case Note & Summary
The Public Interest Litigation was instituted by Anil Jairam Mahajan and his wife Sunita Anil Mahajan following the death of their fifteen-year-old son Harshal during a trekking expedition in Himachal Pradesh in May 2006. The trek was organized by the Third and Fourth Respondents. The postmortem indicated pulmonary edema and hypoxia leading to respiratory failure. The petitioners alleged that the organizers had failed to provide adequate medical support, including a qualified doctor and life-saving drugs. Rather than seeking personal compensation, the petitioners highlighted that over a thousand unregistered organizations in Maharashtra conduct similar treks, often with untrained personnel, particularly during school vacations. They sought comprehensive directions for a regulatory framework to minimize such tragedies. An intervention application was filed by Akhil Maharashtra Giryarohakh Mahasangh, a registered trust, to assist in formulating regulations. The court noted that a large number of tourists from Maharashtra visit high-altitude areas, many without awareness of risks, and that safety of tourists, including women and school children, is a matter of grave concern. An earlier order in December 2012 had impleaded the Indian Mountaineering Foundation and directed the State Government to evolve a comprehensive policy, but no action was taken for over six months. The Division Bench, comprising Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and S.C. Gupte, JJ., emphasized the urgent need for structural directions. The court did not frame the policy itself, considering it a matter for the executive, but directed the Principal Secretaries of the School Education and Sports Department and the Tourism Department to convene meetings with all stakeholders, including the intervenor and petitioners, to formulate an appropriate policy framework. It further directed the State to advertise safety precautions in the media before vacations and to disseminate information through schools and colleges. The Principal Secretaries were ordered to file a compliance report by 12 October 2013, and the petition was to be placed for verification of compliance on 18 October 2013. The petitioners were given liberty to revive the proceedings if no action was taken. The petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Public Interest Litigation - Directions for Policy Formulation - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Petition filed seeking directions to frame policy for adventure tourism safety; court exercised writ jurisdiction to issue structural directions for the State to convene stakeholder meetings and formulate a comprehensive regulatory framework, emphasizing the State's duty to protect tourists and children. Held that while the court will not itself frame policy, it can direct the State's Principal Secretaries to evolve suitable guidelines and file a compliance report within three months, with liberty to petitioners to revive proceedings if no action is taken (Paras 1-7). B) Tourism and Adventure Sports - Trekking and Mountaineering - Unregistered Organizations and Safety Standards - Bombay Public Trusts Act - Concern over over a thousand unregistered organizations conducting treks without training or adequate safety measures; court noted the tragic death of petitioner's son due to lack of life-saving facilities and stressed the need for registration and stringent safety protocols. Directed the School Education & Sports and Tourism Departments to include Intervenor and petitioners in consultations, advertise precautions in media, and educate parents and students, with a compliance report to be filed by 12 October 2013 and matter listed for verification on 18 October 2013 (Paras 3-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State of Maharashtra should be directed to frame a comprehensive policy and regulatory framework to ensure the safety of participants in trekking and mountaineering expeditions organized by unregistered organizations.
Final Decision
Petition disposed of with directions: (i) Principal Secretaries of School Education and Sports Department and Tourism Department to convene a meeting with all stakeholders, including petitioners and intervenor, to formulate appropriate policy framework; (ii) State Government to advertise precautions and safety requirements in media, schools, and colleges before vacations; (iii) Compliance report to be filed by Principal Secretaries with Registrar (Judicial) by 12 October 2013; (iv) Petition to be placed for verification on 18 October 2013; (v) Liberty to petitioners to revive proceedings if no action taken. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- State's constitutional duty to ensure safety of tourists and children in adventure activities
- need for regulatory framework for unregistered trekking organizations
- structural directions under Article 226 in public interest
- precautionary publicity through media and schools
- compliance monitoring
