Disposed

Abdul Rasheed Qureshi v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC11 Dec 2017W.P.(C)/4242/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court addressed a writ petition seeking specific directions for bridge construction and traffic management to relieve congestion at Wazirabad Bridge. Holding that it is not the Court's role to prescribe specific construction measures, it directed the Government of NCT of Delhi to examine the flagged problems and take steps towards mitigation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Government of NCT of Delhi to examine the commuters' problems flagged by the petitioner and take steps towards their mitigation, submitting the decision within four months.

Abdul Rasheed Qureshi Vs Union of India… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

Signature Not Verified Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:05.10.2024 15:56 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per 7 the physical file an d no page is missing.

¶2

traffic it talces.

¶3

In view of the extreme inconvenience faced by the commuters,the writ petition seelcsthe followingprayers:

¶4

"7. Issue/pass directions more specifically to respondents1 and2 to constructone or more bridgesup stream of Yamuna beyond/afterthe Wazirabadbarrage (bridge).

¶5

2.Direct respondentsto constructa six lane bridgefrom Chauhan Patti Village, near Sonia Vihar, to Burari.

¶6

Direct respondents to increase the width of existing WazirabadBarrage to six lanes.'

¶7

Direct respondents to Implement a 24 hour no entry for commercial vehicles over the Wazirabad Barrage.

¶8

Direct respondents to provide of a temporary pontoon Bridge over Yamuna River for light traffic vehicle to supplement the currently used Wazirabad Bridge."

¶9

In responseto the noticeto show cause, a statusreport dated 25^*^ August, 2017 has been filed by the Traffic Inspector,Khajuri Khas Circle pointing out the extreme difficulties as under:

¶10

"/? is submitted that Wazirabad Bridge is the only two lane barrage for the commuters residing nearby the area and the Trans Yamuna Area to go to New Delhi. Afterpassage of time, traffic congestion increased due to the dense population in the North East Area. No alternate bridge has been constructed to ease out the congestion.

¶11

As per PWD Engr. the width of Wazirabad Bridge is

¶12

Page 2 of 6

¶13

W.P.(C)No.4242/2017

¶14

11.95 Mtrs (including3 Mtrs footpath for pedestrian on the downstream and 1.60 Mtrs footpath for the pedestrianon the upstream). Only 7.30 Mtrs. is used for the vehicularmoment (sic. movement). The bridge is approx. Half km long. Approx. 1 Lacs vehiclesofall kind such as buses, HTVs, LGVs, Car, two wheelers, TSRs, slow moving trafficpasses through this Bridge duringthe day (8am to 10 am&8pm to10pm). Apart from this 1 thousandpedestriansalso use this bridge to reach their destinations.

¶15

¶16

It worthwhile mentioned here that Wazirabad Bridge is two lanes and the road connected to the Wazirabad Bridge from Khajuri to Wazirabad are four lanes in order to regulatethe smoothflow of trafficat Wazirabad and Ring Road to Wazirabadare regulated manually. Since the volume of trafficfrom Khajuri to Wazirabadis very high in the morningand the volume of trafficfrom Ring Road to Wazirabad is very High in the evening, hence one way traffic system was adoptedfrom 8 AMto 10AMfrom theKhajuri Chowk to Wazirabadand 8 PM to 10 PMfor the trafficfrom Ring Road to Wazirabad. Such decision has been taken by the traffic Police in the publicInterestand moreparticularlyin the interestofthe commuters who reside in the nearby area. It is important to mentionthroughsuch regulation/restrictionthat traffic passes throughsuch narrow bridgesuccessfully.

¶17

It is further submitted that, 01 Zonal Officer and 04 Constablesare deployedto WazirabadBridge in Khajuri side in each shiftsfrom 7AMto 3 PM andfrom 3 PM to 11 PM to regulate the traffic smoothly and sufficient staffs are also deployed in Wazirabadside too. It is pertinentto mentionhere thata requestwas sent to PWD on 06.12.2016to construct thepontoon Bridge near the Wazirabad Bridge but the request was turned down because the site where earlier pontoon Bridge was installed is now in use for construction of Signature Bridge, hence, for last 3 years no pontoon bridge has

¶18

Page 3of6

¶19

W.P.(C)No.4242/2017

¶20

been erected/installed there.

¶21

It 4s also worth to mention that Signature Bridge is under construction near to the existing, Wazirabad Bridge since 2010. It is not yet finished even after the lapse of the target of completion."

¶22

(Emphasis suppHed)

¶23

The respondent No.8-Delhi Police (Traffic) has also pointed out that earlier pontoon bridges were installed for crossing the Yamuna river for periods other than monsoon. However, for the last three year, there is no provision for any such bridges.

¶24

, 5. The respondent No.4-Delhi Development Authority had made the following disclosure in its counter affidavit:

¶25

"(5. As regards the Roads, Bridges etc., the PWD, GNCTD is the implementing agency and the road owning agency and the planning, designing, construction and maintenance of the same is the responsibility of the said Department. The management of the traffic is the domain of the Police Department. As already submitted, both the above department have been impleaded as the parties in the writ petition vide the order passed by this Hon 'ble Court.

¶26

In respect of Paras 7(1) and (II), it is submitted that the same are matter ofrecord.

¶27

In respect ofpara 7 (III) and (IV), the matter pertains to PWD, GNCTD. The answering respondent further submits that the Unified Traffic and Transportation Infrastructure (Planning & Engineering) Centre (UTTIPEC) was set up by Delhi Development Authority in exercise ofpowers conferred by the act notified in the Gazette of India Extraordinary vide S.O. No.1903 (E)

¶28

Page 4 of 6

¶29

W.P. (C) No.4242/2017

¶30

•

¶31

dated 31.07.2008, with the purpose of studying and coordinating the norms and standards for planning and engineering practices in Traffic and Transporation. On 27.08.2013, PWD vide its letter no. 23(Misc.)/F12/PWD/285 had requested for consideration ofTerms of Reference (TOR)for improvement plan of the corridors - Pusta No.3 to Chandgi Ram Akhara, Sonia Vihar to Jagatpur and Sabhapur to Sant nagar Burari, near GT Road. In response, the UTTIPEC has forwarded the terms of reference vide its letter dated 29.08.2013 to the Project Manager, Flyover Project Circle F-12, PWD, GNCTD. The necessary actions/decision in furtherance of the same has to be taken by the PWD, GNCTD. A true copy of the letter dated 29.08.2013 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure R-1."

¶32

The Delhi Development Authority has enclosed a document dated 29^^ August, 2013 on the subject""TermsofReference(TOR) for Integrated Transit Corridor Development and Street Network/Connectivity Plan for the corridor/influence zone alongwith detailed design of all intersections and mid-sections based on trajfic and feasibility studies for the corridor/network". Amongst three corridors, Sonia Vihar -Jagatpur corridor has been listed in this communication. This communication stands addressed to the Project Manager, Flyover Project Circle F-12, PWD, GNCTD, Ramesh Park, New Shakarpur Police Station, Delhi-110092.

¶33

It would appear that despite the gravity of the situation and the extreme difficulties faced by the citizens of this area of Delhi, Public Works Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi has not moved a

¶34

Page 5 of6

¶35

W.P.(C) No.4242/2017

¶36

single step even towards undertaking the planning for providing any facility to mitigate the difficulties of the commuters.

¶37

It is not open for this Court to undertake or prescribe measures for construction of bridges, roads, etc. This is purely the task of the concerned authorities.

¶38

In view of the above, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Govt. of NCT of Delhi through its Chief Secretary . to ensure that an examination is undertaken with regard to the problems flagged by the petitioner to ensure that steps are taken towards the difficulties of the commuters who seek to cross the Yamuna river at the areas mentioned in the writ petition.

¶39

The decision which is taken by the GNCTD shall be communicated to the petitioner within four months from today and action thereon taken thereafter.

¶40

In case the petitioner is aggrieved by any act or omission of the respondents,libertyis grantedto file an appropriatepetitionin this regard in accordance with law.

¶41

Dasti.

¶42

^TINGCHIErlUSTICE
C.HAR

¶43

DECEMBER 11, 2017/pmc

¶44

Page 6of6

¶45

W.P.(C)No.4242/2017

Abdul Rasheed Qureshi v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Rasheed Qureshi v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Mittal & Anr. Vs Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.

Rajinder Singh & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

S C Johnson Products Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -22(2), New Dlehi

Hira Lal Vs Central Board of Secondary Education and Ors.

Mahender Kumar Sharma & Ors. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Govind Yadav Vs Union of India & Ors.

A. Mishra Vs Union of India & Ors.

Suresh Kumar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Parvesh Vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Vinod Kumar and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kusum Lata Vs Delhi Transport Corporation and Ors.

Indu Rohatgi Vs Pawan Kumar Jain & Ors.

Sridhar Kotagiri Vs Union of India & Ors.

Fasal Vs Dy Commissioner S D M C and Ors.