MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Upholds Expressway Construction: Public Interest Paramount Over Private Concerns: Hyderabad High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Hyderabad High Court has upheld the construction of an expressway extension and flyover, dismissing a writ petition that challenged the project. The court, in its judgment, emphasized the paramount importance of public interest in infrastructure development and the need to balance it against individual concerns.

In its observations, the court stated, "The government has the responsibility to act in tune with the growing requirements and take steps to provide the road and other facilities to the inhabitants of the city." It further added, "In case of a conflict between public interest and individual interest, public interest will outweigh the personal interest."

The petitioners had raised objections to the construction, alleging violations of rules and procedures in road widening and construction. However, the court noted that the petitioners' legal rights had not been affected, and the earlier dismissal of similar petitions had already attained finality.

The court also referred to the principles laid out in the case of Jayabheri Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, which highlighted the need to consider the viability of road alignments in ecologically sensitive zones while balancing public interest and individual landowners' interests.

This ruling underscores the significance of infrastructure development for the city's growth and serves as a reminder of the courts' limited jurisdiction in the absence of legal infirmities and mala fide actions by the authorities.

The judgment reaffirms the courts' commitment to uphold projects that serve the larger public interest while acknowledging the need to protect the environment and preserve water bodies in the area.

The decision has implications for similar cases involving infrastructure development across the region, as it sets a precedent for weighing public welfare against individual grievances in matters of urban planning and development.

Date of Decision: 1 November 2023

Mr. Srikanth V J Tanikella VS The State Of Telangana  

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/THC-01-Nov-23-Mr_Srikanth_V_J_Tanikella_vs_The_State_Of_Telangana.pdf"]

Latest Legal News