No Work No Pay: Delhi High Court Denies Back Wages To Reinstated Army Officer State Cannot Use 'Delay & Laches' To Evade Compensation For Land Taken Without Authority Of Law: Calcutta High Court Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Jail Appeal Solely On 3157-Day Delay; Orders Release Of Life Convict After 22 Years In Jail 138 NI Act | Failure To Produce Income Tax Returns Not Fatal To Cheque Bounce Case If Debt Is Established: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Public Records Not In Party's 'Power Or Possession' Until Actually Obtained; Leave Not Required For Rebuttal Documents: AP High Court For Conviction Under Section 34 IPC, Prosecution Must Establish Prior Meeting Of Minds & Pre-Arranged Plan: Allahabad High Court Merciless Beating With Blunt Side Of Deadly Weapons To Spread Terror Constitutes Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court CIT Can’t Invoke Revisionary Jurisdiction Merely Because AO’s Enquiry Was ‘Inadequate’ If View Is Plausible: Bombay High Court Mere Presence At Crime Scene Without Proof Of Prior Concert Insufficient To Invoke Section 34 IPC For Murder: Supreme Court Courts Cannot Be Used As Tools For Coercion: Bombay HC Dismisses Application To Implead Developer Without Contractual Nexus, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Cost Specific Performance Cannot Be Granted For Contingent Contracts Dependent On Third-Party Conveyance: Madras High Court Unlawful Subletting Is A ‘Continuing Wrong’, Fresh Limitation Period Runs As Long As Breach Continues: Bombay High Court Courts Must Specify Payment Timeline In Specific Performance Decrees; Order XX Rule 12A CPC Is Mandatory: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Does Not Automatically Rescind Due To Delay; Courts Can Extend Time For Deposit: Supreme Court Madras High Court Quashes Forgery Case Against Mahindra World City After Victims Accept Alternate Land In Settlement Motor Accident Claims: 13-Day FIR Delay Not Fatal; 80% Physical Disability Can Be Treated As 100% Functional Disability: Punjab & Haryana HC Murderer Cannot Inherit Property From Victim Through Wills; Section 25 Hindu Succession Act Bar Applies To Testamentary Succession: Supreme Court Courts Must Pierce Veil Of Clever Drafting To Reject Suits Barred By Benami Law; 2016 Amendments Are Retrospective: Supreme Court Indian Railways Is A Consumer, Not A Deemed Distribution Licensee; Must Pay Cross-Subsidy Surcharge For Open Access: Supreme Court Technical Rules Of Evidence Act Do Not Apply To Departmental Enquiries: Supreme Court Public Employment Cannot Be Converted Into An Instrument Of Fraud; Police Personnel Using Dual Identity Strikes At Root Of Service: Supreme Court

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers

27 September 2024 9:41 AM

By: Deepak Kumar


High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, in the case of Welfare Committee Naugran Prithipur Sehora and Kotli Mian Fateh v. Union of India and Others (WP(C)PIL No.10/2023), issued a significant ruling addressing the lack of safe passage for villagers impacted by the construction of the Jammu Ring Road. The court directed the respondents, including the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), to construct an overhead bridge or underpass to alleviate the severe inconvenience faced by villagers in crossing the highway, setting a key precedent for public infrastructure cases.

The case arose after the Welfare Committee, representing the residents of Villages Naugran, Prithipur, Sehora, and Kotli Mian Fateh, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking construction of service lanes and crossing lanes beneath the Ring Road. The villagers argued that the road’s construction had created significant difficulties, including blocking access to homes, agricultural lands, and essential public spaces like the cremation ground. The villagers also raised concerns about water stagnation during the rainy season and the lack of irrigation channels due to the road's construction.

The primary legal issue was whether the failure to provide adequate infrastructure (such as underpasses or bridges) beneath the Ring Road violated the rights of the villagers to safe access and whether the respondents were obligated to restore irrigation channels obstructed by the road construction.

During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the respondents had neglected their duty, leaving villagers exposed to dangerous situations while crossing the road. The petitioners emphasized that urgent steps were needed to avoid a "death trap," especially given the high speed of vehicles on the Ring Road.

The respondents, represented by the NHAI, contended that they had already provided underpasses and service lanes at other locations and that the work was ongoing in some areas. However, the Court appointed a commissioner to assess the situation on the ground.

The Court, relying on the Commissioner's report, noted that "villagers in one voice stated acute hardships in crossing the Highway where speedy vehicles pass frequently", and expressed concerns about the lack of basic provisions for safe crossing. The report confirmed that water channels were blocked, and access to vital services had been disrupted.

The Court observed that while the NHAI had taken steps in some areas, the lack of attention to these particular villages was causing severe inconvenience. Notably, the report highlighted the absence of an overhead bridge or underpass, which had been provided at other locations like Sehora and Kotli Mian Fateh.

Based on these findings, the Court directed the NHAI to take immediate steps to construct an overhead bridge or underpass to facilitate safe passage. The Court further ordered the restoration of irrigation channels and measures to prevent water stagnation during the rainy season.

In this landmark decision, the High Court has emphasized the necessity of balancing public infrastructure projects with the safety and convenience of local populations. By mandating the construction of safe crossings and restoration of vital irrigation channels, the Court has set an important precedent in safeguarding the rights of affected communities.

Date of Decision: 25th September 2024

Welfare Committee Naugran Prithipur Sehora and Kotli Mian Fateh v. Union of India and Others

Latest Legal News