PWD Cannot Permit Any Construction On Road Margin Of State Highways, Permission From Local Municipal Authority Must: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that though the road margin on a State Highway vests with the Public Works Department, it cannot sanction or allot a road margin area to any private party for putting up construction of any nature, even if such construction is for public convenience, without approval from Municipal Authority. A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the...
The Karnataka High Court has held that though the road margin on a State Highway vests with the Public Works Department, it cannot sanction or allot a road margin area to any private party for putting up construction of any nature, even if such construction is for public convenience, without approval from Municipal Authority.
A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj allowed the petition filed by Severine Lobo, who challenged the order of PWD's Assistant Executive Engineer granting licence to one Saroja for putting a Nandani milk parlour on a State highway margin in front of his property at Mangalore.
Lobo contended that PWD officers could not have permitted Saroja to put up any construction at the said place as it blocks the access to his house. It was further contended that the road margin cannot be used for any construction as it poses an obstacle beside the Highway. Moreover, it was argued that no allotment was made by the grama panchayat.
Saroja opposed the plea and challenged the notice of the panchayat directing her to remove the construction. She submitted she had necessary permissions and if her operations are stopped, it would affect her livelihood.
The bench went through the records and at the outset observed that,
"the Public Works Department by itself cannot permit any construction on any property without the Municipal Authority approving the sanction of building plans for such construction or to put it in other words merely because the Public Works Department were to permit a private party to put up such construction, such construction cannot be put up without such private party obtaining necessary sanction of plan and/or building licence in relation thereto.”
It added that in the event of public land to be granted to a private person or entity, the same would amount to distribution of State Largesse, which cannot be done without calling for a tender or the like. “No private person can be allotted any land without complying with the Transparency Act (The Karnataka Transparency In Public Procurements Act) and bringing the property for auction. The allotment could be made to the successful bidder who thereafter would have to obtain necessary plan sanction and building licence for construction.”
Court also agreed with Petitioner's contention qua obstruction of his property and observed, “A private party having frontage to the road would be entitled to the entire frontage including the visibility of the building from the road. The same cannot be taken over by the Public Authority including the Public Works Department by putting up any construction on the footpath or the road margin in front of the property of a private party.”
Accordingly, it allowed the petition filed by Lobo and directed PWD to demolish the construction in question within 60 days.
Appearance: Advocate N.S.Sriraj Gowda, for Petitioner.
AGA Naveen Chandrashekhar for R1, R3, R4.
Advocate Sharanjith Shetty.K, for R2.
Advocate H.V.Devaraju, for R5, R6.
Advocate Nagaraja Hegde, for R7.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 383
Case Title: Severine Lobo And State of Karnataka & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 13696 OF 2022, C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 4870 OF 2023.