Remanded

Manjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Jul 2012CWP/680/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A specialized High Court noted that while courts lack expertise to modify infrastructure designs, the Improvement Trust must convene a meeting within one month to explore feasibility of petitioners' suggestions regarding fly-over access.

What did the court decide?

The Improvement Trust directed to convene a meeting of Architects/Engineers within one month to explore feasibility of extending landing portion for access.

Manjit Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

Date of Decision : July 23, 2012 Civil Writ Petition No.680 of 2012

¶3

Manjit Singh & others

¶4

..... PETITIONER(S)

¶5

VERSUS State of Punjab & others

¶6

..... RESPONDENT(S)

¶7

. . .

¶8

Civil Writ Petition No.10899 of 2012

¶9

Kuldeep Kumar & others

¶10

..... PETITIONER(S)

¶11

VERSUS State of Punjab & others

¶12

..... RESPONDENT(S)

¶13

. . .

¶14

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH

¶15

. . .

¶16

PRESENT: - Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vishal Sodhi, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶17

Ms. Monica Chhibbar Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 and 4.

¶18

Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶19

Mr. Sharan Sethi, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

¶20

. . .

¶21

CWP No.680 of 2012 [2]

¶22

Surya Kant, J (Oral)

¶23

This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition No.680

¶24

of 2012 and Civil Writ Petition No.10899 of 2012 as both the writ petitions raise a common issue.

¶25

The petitioners are running their commercial establishments like shops and petrol pump opposite the District Courts near Kitchlu Chowk at Amritsar. The State Government, in association with Improvement Trust, Amritsar and another Government agency, has decided to build a fly-over at Kitchlu Chowk in order to address the problem of congestion and traffic jam.

¶26

The grievance of the petitioners is against the designing of the fly-over as according to them it will seriously affect access to their premises. In the case of a petrol pump, it is asserted that it shall be left with no access to the main road which is one of the precondition to run the retail out-let. It is also urged by the petitioners that if the landing portion of the proposed fly-over is extended about 20 meters for which there is sufficient space available, their grievance can be suitably redressed.

¶27

We may mention here that notice of motion was issued by a co-ordinate Bench on 8.2.2012 (CWP No.680 of 2012) on the limited issue to explore the possibility of finding a proper access for the petitioners.

¶28

We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and seen the site plan.

¶29

CWP No.680 of 2012 [3]

¶30

It requires no emphasis to say that the designing or construction of a fly-over falls within the exclusive domain of the experts comprising Architects and Engineers etc. The Courts generally are not well equipped with the kind of expertise on the basis of which a direction to modify/ amend the drawings or designing of a fly-over can be issued. The appropriate recourse in the given facts and circumstances, therefore, would be to direct the team of Architects/ Engineers who are engaged in the construction of the fly-over to objectively consider the suggestions given by the petitioners as to whether a marginal increase in the landing portion of the fly-over can provide direct access to the petitioners' establishments and whether such extension in landing is feasible at the spot.

¶31

The Improvement Trust shall immediately convene a meeting of its Architects/ Engineers who shall hear and associate the petitioners while visiting the spot to explore the feasibility of carrying out the desired modification/ amendment in the design of fly-over to achieve the above mentioned objective. Needful shall be done within a period of one month.

¶32

(Surya Kant)

¶33

(R.P. Nagrath)

¶34

July 23, 2012 Judge avin

Manjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Gobind Enterprises Vs M/S Baba Gurmukh Singh Auto Ltd.

Mangat Mohan @ Manga Vs Renu and Ors.

Anil Kumar Garg Vs Naurang Dass and Ors.

Barfi Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S on Dot Couriers & Cargo Ltd. & Anr. Vs Permanent Lok Adalat & Ors.

Virender Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Another