Gujarat HC Dismisses PIL Against Bridge Construction At Ahmedabad's Panjrapole Crossing Over Claims Of Reduction In Green Cover

The Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 17) dismissed a PIL moved by residents of Ahmedabad pertaining to the construction of a bridge at Panjrapole cross roads over the Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Marg (IIM road), claiming that it will lead to reduction of green cover in the city. A division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi while pronouncing the order said, "The instant Public Interest Litigation is dismissed". The PIL was moved by 20 residents of the city with respect to the bridge construction covering an area length of 652 metres.Grounds of ChallengeThe court in its 70-page order noted that the petitioners had not challenged the decision making process, but raised the challenge on the ground that there is no requirement for a flyover at the Panjrapol junction, as there is no significant traffic problem at the junction and this was clear from three expert reports relied on by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation(AMC). The court noted that the petitioners had raised a challenge on the ground that construction of the flyover will result in extremely narrow 4 meters service lane on both the sides, which will further result in major congestion over the road between the two bridges. Court cannot cross Lakshman Rekha and substitute view of decision making body The court however said, "All these arguments, made with vehemence, as noted hereinabove, are directed to challenge the decision itself and not the decision making process.The first and foremost guiding principle for the Court would be to draw 'Laxman rekha' between the decision actually taken and the decision-making process. It is not permissible nor possible for the Court to cross the line (Laxman rekha) and substitute its view over the view of the decision making authority, i.e. the AMC, which is based on the report of the technical experts". Cannot brush aside Expert Body's reportIt said that the petitioner had relied on the 2017 guidelines of IRC (Indian Road Congress) that suggested that as a thumb rule, the construction of flyover should only be for traffic above 10,000 PCU/hour, adding that it was "wholly unacceptable". It said that the IRC guidelines which has no statutory flavour, cannot brush aside report by Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat (SVNIT) published in 2024. The report gave a clear opinion as to how the performance of an intersection can be assessed in terms of the level of service (LOS) and for optimisation of intersection's traffic signal cycle length, the range of value of vehicular delay at the intersection can be improved with the proposed system. SVNIT had said that in 2024, the intersection experiences a delay of 96 second per Passenger Car Unit (PCU) with the proposed system as compared to a delay of 171 seconds per PCU with the existing system. The Court then dismissed the claims of the irregularities in SVNIT's report and said, "This opinion drawn by the expert body equipped with highly technical knowledge, cannot be brushed aside by this Court by attaching any illegality or mala fide to the recommendations made by the institution namely SVNIT". It also rejected the petitioners contention that SVNIT report is to be rejected as perverse as it had been obtained in a highly suspicious manner, observing that the report was submitted after conducting a detailed survey when the work was assigned by the AMC to the SVNIT. This road is too technical for the court to tread onIt said, “As regards the data of reduction of peak hour volume (PC per hour) as indicated from the reports of 2012, 2020 and 2024, suffice it to record that the said factor alone cannot be taken on the face value to attach any illegality in the decision of the AMC to construct the flyover. Moreover, this road is too technical for the Court to tread on. For the above discussion, all the objections raised by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners about the decision made by the AMC in the matter of construction of the proposed flyover over the Panjrapol junction are liable to be turned down.”Every citizen's civic responsibility to maintain green coverThe Court then noted the assurance of AMC to replant 19 of 21 trees and its plan to plant 30 lakh trees to restore forest cover in Ahmedabad. It said that the gradual decrease in the forest cover of Ahmedabad cannot be attributed to the projects of the AMC alone. "The Court may only propose to take a judicial note of the fact that it is the duty of the citizenry as well to replenish/re-plant the trees and maintain the green cover while raising private constructions. The civic responsibility of maintaining green cover is the duty and responsibility of each and every citizenry, namely the residents of the city. We understand that in some development projects, there may be requirement of uprooting or replanting the existing trees, however, the said loss can be compensated by alternatives by adopting technology of replanting of existing trees and...

Gujarat HC Dismisses PIL Against Bridge Construction At Ahmedabad's Panjrapole Crossing Over Claims Of Reduction In Green Cover

Lovina B Thakkar

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Lovina B Thakkar

Gujarat HC Dismisses PIL Against Bridge Construction At Ahmedabad's Panjrapole Crossing Over Claims Of Reduction In Green Cover

Lovina B Thakkar

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Lovina B Thakkar

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers