Supreme Court Asks Union To Consider Framing National Policy On Common Utility Ducts For Telecom, Etc. In Highways

The Supreme Court recently called on the Union of India to explore the desirability of framing a National Policy on common utility ducts for all public utilities, such as telecom services, along highways and other roadways.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard the matter and gave 4 weeks' time to the government to consider the desirability of framing such a policy.

The bench was dealing with a PIL filed in 2021 by one Haripriya Patel, seeking formulation of a comprehensive standard policy for common utility ducts for all public utilities (such as telecom), to be included in all construction plans of highways and other roadways.

The petitioner claimed that this can solve the issue of unnecessary re-digging and trenching of roadways, as well as reduce the wastage of public funds in the process. She argued through the petition,

"Joint construction of highways and telecom network is not only feasible but pragmatic because multiple ducts laid along the highway can be used for the following purposes:

a. Avoid duplication of civil work for various essential public services, thereby avoiding loss of public funds.

b. Avoid rapid deterioration of roads due to recurring civil work (excavation/trenching) on account of various essential public services.

c. Avoid road accidents due to perennial maintenance of the infrastructure projects.

d. Real time highway traffic management.

e. Implementation of efficient toll facilities.

f. Uninterrupted telecom network and service."

The petitioner further mentioned that such facilities were recommended by various expert bodies and included in Guidelines dated 22.11.2016 issued by Ministry of Road Transport and Highways as well as National Digital Communications Policy 2018. A long-standing proposal sought to replace the system of first laying the roads and re-digging them later to lay ducts. It remained under consideration of government bodies since 2002, but was not approved due to lack of coordination between different government Ministries/departments.

Appearance: AoR Srisatya Mohanty (for petitioner); ASG Vikramjit Banerjee and Senior Advocate Nachiketa Joshi (for respondents)

Case Title: HARIPRIYA PATEL Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 304/2021

Click here to read the order