Disposed

Citizen Forum and Ors. v. State Th.Chief Sec. and Ors.

J&K HC22 Nov 2022PIL/43/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order deals with a PIL concerning traffic congestion. The Court examined the compliance report regarding Smart City and Metrolite projects. Finding the proposed corridor covered by the Metrolite Project, the Court was satisfied and disposed of the PIL, requesting authorities to ensure completion

What did the court decide?

The PIL is closed; the Court expresses hope that authorities will ensure completion of the projects for traffic de-congestion.

Citizen Forum and Ors. Vs State Th.Chief… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | J&K HC (2022)

¶1

Serial No. 14 Regular Cause List

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

PIL No. 43/2013 IA No. 02/2018

¶4

Citizen Forum and Ors.

¶5

… Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through: - Mr. Aditya Sharma, Advocate

¶7

V/s

¶8

State through Chief Secy., and Ors.

¶9

… Respondent(s)

¶10

Through: -

¶11

Mr. D. C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

Hon’ble the Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, Judge

¶14

(ORDER)

¶15

22.11.2022

¶16

The instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed interalia to

¶17

highlight the traffic congestion prevalent in the city of Jammu and in particular Amphalla-Jail Road-New Plot Road-Janipura Road as also the connecting B. C. Road.

¶18

The respondents have given the details about the approach for widening of the aforementioned roads from the year 2007-2008 at the project cost of Rs. 18.04 Crores , as also for construction of a flyover projects.

¶19

Respondents from time to time had taken stand that the subject matter of widening of roads, construction of flyovers etc., falls within

¶20

the scope and powers of the Jammu and Kashmir Economic Reconstruction Agency (in short ERA). It has been further stated that looking to the traffic problems, widening of the B.C. road was envisaged to make it 8 lane road. However, since the said project involved acquisition of about 53 Kanals of land as also re-settlement and relocation, the same translated into huge costs. The projects for the development of the city have also been stated to be financed by Asian Development Bank (ADB), wherever the land acquisition and resettlement issues are settled on the guidelines issued by the Government from time to time.

¶21

During the pendency of the instant PIL, we have noticed that proposal with regard to widening of B. C. road-Amphalla-New PlotJanipura road was not reflected in any of the projects on account of reasons stated for involving huge amount of acquisition and relocation.

¶22

In terms of order passed on 18.03.2021, the Court sought examination of the issues involved in this PIL with reference to being covered under the Master Plan directly or indirectly or the Smart City Project and the time frame, the issues would be dealt with under the said project.

¶23

Compliance report stands filed by the respondents, perusal whereof reveals that a detailed report submitted by the Jammu Municipal Corporation to the Principal Secretary to Government Housing and Urban Development Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu, regarding the various projects under Smart City Plan (SCP). In

¶24

the compliance report, it is stated that there is no proposal under the Jammu Smart City Project for construction of flyover from Shakuntla Chowk-Balwinder Chowk-Amphalla, Jammu connecting Jail Road and New Plot, Janipur. However, the Metrolite Project for Jammu City encompasses the following proposal:-

¶25

“The Proposed Jammu Metrolite under its comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) includes the development of Bantalab-Greater KailashBari Brahmana Corridor, which includes the target area of the PIL No. 43/2013 and the projected designated capacity of the Metrolite for the route is sufficient to accommodate the total traffic of Public Transport along with this Corridor.

¶26

All the documents related to Jammu Metrolite viz DPRs approved by the AC, the comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) and the Alternative Analysis Report have been forwarded to MoHUA, Government of India for appraisal and funding of the project. A copy of the OM No. HUD-LITOMISC/85/2021-12504 dated 10.09.2021 is enclosed and the same is marked as Annexure-R2 .

¶27

Mr. D. C. Raina, learned Advocate General, submits that the Jammu Metrolite under its comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP), includes the development of Bantalab-Greater Kailash-Bari Brahmana Corridor and all the documents related to Jammu Metrolite viz DPRs approved by the Administrative Council (AC), the comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) and the alternative Analysis Report have been forwarded to Ministry of Housing and Urban Development Department, Government of India for appraisal and funding of the project. The communications referred along with the projects showing future of the projects have also been enclosed with the status report.

¶28

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in the event the de-congestion of traffic in the Jammu city is ensured in terms

¶29

of the Metrolite Project, the petitioners shall also feel satisfied, however, the perusal of the compliance report reveals that same is dependent on the release of funds by the Government of India.

¶30

We are satisfied with the stand taken by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir in consultation with the Government of India, in meeting the requirement of congestion of traffic in the city of Jammu and widening of roads as also the road connectivity as extended to large extent, we feel that the approach adopted by the Government of J&K and Government of India in dealing with the interests of the people shall satisfy the petitioners to the extent they have projected in this PIL.

¶31

In the above background, there is no further requirement to proceed in this PIL, as such, the same shall stand closed. However, we hope and trust that the authorities will ensure completion of these projects for the convenience of public and for de-congestion of traffic in Jammu city.

¶32

Disposed of along with connected CM(s).

¶33

(Vinod Chatterji Koul) (Ali Mohammad Magrey) Judge Chief Justice

¶34

JAMMU

¶35

22.11.2022

¶36

“Mohammad Yasin Dar”

Citizen Forum and Ors. v. State Th.Chief Sec. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Citizen Forum and Ors. v. State Th.Chief Sec. and 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

Court on Its Own Motion Vs State of J and K and Ors. (Health and Medical Education)

Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Forum Vs Union of India and Ors. (Revenue )

Court of Its Own Motion Vs State of J and K and Ors.

Dewakar Sharma Vs Uoi.Th.Ministry of Youth Affairs and Ors.

In Re-Conditions of Jails of Under Trial Vs State of J and K and Others (Home Deptt)

Bodh Raj and Ors. Vs State of Jammu and Kashmir and Ors.

Sheikh Sajjad Hussain Vs State Th.P.D.D.and Ors.

Sumit Nayyar Vs State Th.Forests Deptt.and Ors.

Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise J and K Jammu Vs M/S Gaurav Agro - Chem Industries Sicop Igc Kathua J and K

Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise J and K Jammu Vs M/S Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Igc Samba J and K

Commissioner of Cgst and Central Excise Jammu Vs Nanda Mint and Pine Chemicals Ltd.

Soma Devi and Anr. Vs M.D., J and K Housing Board and Ors.

Anil Dutt and Others Vs U T of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary Revenue Deptt and Others

Sukhdev Singh and Others Vs U T of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary Revenue Deptt and Others