Dismissed

T. Gopalakrishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Jun 2015WP(C)/6421/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the construction of a Rail Over Bridge at Angadipuram per national and railway norms. The court held that the government had a policy decision in consultation with railways and the work was substantially complete, rendering judicial interference unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's prayer for a writ of mandamus directing the construction of a Rail Over Bridge was denied; petition dismissed.

T. Gopalakrishnan Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶5

THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/14TH JYAISHTA, 1937

¶6

WP(C).No. 6421 of 2015 (S)

¶7

PETITIONER(S) :

¶8

T. GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O.C.M.KRISHNA PODUVAL, MANNAT HOUSE, KOKKUR, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM-679 591.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAGADEESH SMT.V.RENJU

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL HIGHWAY SUB DIVISION, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 322.

¶13

3. MANAGING DIRECTOR, ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA, 2ND FLOOR, PREETHI BUILDING, M.V.ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI- 682 025.

¶14

4. CHIEF ENGINEER, (CONSTRUCTION), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 016.

¶15

5. REGIONAL OFFICER, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005.

¶16

6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH WAY DIVISION, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MALAPPURAM-679 505.

¶17

..2/-

¶18

..2..

¶19

WP(C).No. 6421 of 2015 (S)

¶20

----------------------------------------

¶21

7. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND RESEARCH CENTRE, NO.19/1429, CHAND NIVAS, KOTTAKKAL ROAD, BAJANA KOIL JUNCTION, CHALAPURAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 002.

¶22

R1, R2 & R6 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.I.DAVIS R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.VIJAYA KUMAR, S.C R4 BY ADV. SRI.C.S.DIAS, S.C R5 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R7 BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNARAJ, S.C

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

Msd.

¶25

WP(C).No. 6421 of 2015 (S)

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶28

EXT.P1:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE G.O.(RT).NO.73/2011/PWD, DATED 17.01.2011.
EXT.P2:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL ENGINEER OF SOUTHERN RAILWAY DATED 08.12.2011.
EXT.P3:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF G.O(RT) NO.1540 OF 2011/PWD ALONG WITH ANNEXURE A-11 MENTIONED THEREIN DATED 09.11.2011.
EXT.P4:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE G.O(RT) NO.559/2012/PWD DATED 31.03.2012.
EXT.P5:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F.NO.RW/NH- 36092/1/12-S&R(B) ISSUED BY MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, NEW DELHI DATED 14.09.2012.
EXT.P6:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.8982 OF 2012, DATED 06.12.2012.
EXT.P7:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE G.O(RT)NO.244/2013/PWD DATED 15.02.2013.
EXT.P8:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RELEVANT PART OF THE PLAN SKETCH PREPARED BY THE SOUTHERN RAILWAY.
EXT.P9:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RELEVANT PART OF THE PLAN SKETCH PREPARED FOR THE ROAD AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA.
EXT.P10:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF NORM.1816 OF THE ENGINEERING CODE OF RAILWAYS.(WORKS FOR CIVIL DEPARTMENT/MINISTRIES LEVEL CROSSING, OVER AND UNDER BRIDGES).
EXT.P11:	TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA DATED 18.02.2015, ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
RESPONDE	NT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE

Msd.

**ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * *** W.P.C.No.6421 of 2015

¶33

Dated this the 4^th day of June 2015

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

Shaffique, J

¶36

Petitioner has approached this Court by filing this public interest litigation seeking the following reliefs:

¶37

i. To issue a writ direction or order in the nature of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to construct RoB at N.H.213 at Angadipuram as per “National Highway standards as well as Railway norms” after obtaining sanction from the Regional Officer of Ministry of Road Transport and Highway.”

¶38

The issue projected by the petitioner is regarding the unscientific manner in which the bridge is being constructed at N.H.213 at Angadipuram. According to the petitioner, the width of the bridge is only 7.5 meters. It will narrow down the use of National Highway. This, according to the petitioner, is totally contrary to the norms prescribed

¶39

W.P.C.No.6421/2015

¶40

¶41

by the Central Government and also the undertaking given before this Court by the respondent authorities in W.P.C.No.8982/2012 which has been decided on 06/12/2012.

¶42

Counter affidavit has been filed by the 3^rd respondent inter alia stating that Detailed Project Report was prepared for the construction of Road Over Bridge or underpass in lieu of level cross No.7 at Angadipuram. The General Arrangement Drawing for construction of two lane ROB at Angadipuram was submitted to the Chief Bridge Engineer, Southern Railway in which railways have reported that the level cross No.7 at Angadipuram will be closed on completion of Rail Over Bridge, the same was approved as per letter dated 03/04/2013. Government of Kerala sanctioned an amount of 365 lakhs for road widening of N.H.213 between Angadipuram and Perinthalmanna and road widening was completed by National Highways Wing of Kerala PWD. Further it is stated that Government of Kerala have entrusted Roads and Bridges Development Corporation

¶43

W.P.C.No.6421/2015

¶44

¶45

of Kerala for construction of two lane Rail Over Bridge at Level Cross No.7, at Angadipuram. It is stated that the present width of level cross at Angadipuram is 9 meres which is sufficient for lane traffic. Further it is stated that present width of N.H.213 where proposed Rail Over Bridge is under construction is varying from 12M to 19M which is not sufficient for construction of four lane Highway or Rail Over Bridge. They also referred to a memorandum of understanding executed between Government of Kerala and Railways for construction of a carriage way at a width of 7.5 metres.

¶46

Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, it is borne out from the records that there was an understanding between Government of Kerala and the Railways for construction of railway bridges and the exact details and particulars of the bridge has also been specifically mentioned therein. It is also stated by the 3^rd respondent that the road width is not enough for having two

¶47

W.P.C.No.6421/2015

¶48

¶49

lane traffic or Over Bridge of a two lane traffic having a width of more than 9 metres.

¶50

Under such circumstances, when the Government

¶51

had taken a policy decision in consultation with the railways to construct an over bridge having sufficient width and suitable for the road, this Court will not be justified in a public interest litigation to prevent such an activity. Learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent submits that the construction of the bridge has substantially been completed. Under such circumstances, we do not think that this Court will be justified in interfering with the work being carried out by the competent authorities. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.

¶52

(sd/-)

¶53

(ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶54

(sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

jsr

W.P.C.No.6421/2015 5

W.P.C.No.6421/2015 6

W.P.C.No.6421/2015 7

T. Gopalakrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Gopalakrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Kerala Feeds Limited Vs the Union of India

Dental Council of India(Dci) Vs Annoor Dental College and Hospital

Jayasree S. Vs Superintendent of Police

Prasanth Kumar Vs Annamma George

Shaju P.D. Vs the Licensing Authority and Assistant Drug Controller

The State of Kerala Vs Koratty Matha Technological Institute & Pvt. Ltd, Chalakkuduy, Represented by Its Director M.V. Pau