Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raj Lakshmi Foundation Through Its ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 May, 2024
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND
DHARMADHIKARI
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 3rd OF MAY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 10909 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
RAJ LAKSHMI FOUNDATION THROUGH ITS JOINT
SECRETARY GAURAV SWAROOP SHRIVASTAV S/O SHRI
SHYAM SWAROOP SHRIVASTAV, AGED ABOUT 43
YEARS, OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE 201,202 DM TOWER
21/1 RACE COURSE ROAD, NEW PALASIA, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AJAY BAGADIA LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI
DEVANSH AWAL, ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT
1. AND HOUSING AFFAI VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND URBN AFFAIRS
THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY NIRMAN
2. BHAWAN, MAULANA AZAD ROAD, NEW DELHI
(DELHI)
3. MADHYA PRADESH METRO RAIL CORP. LTD.
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2ND FLOOR,
SMART CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
2
OFFICE BUILDING KALIBADI ROAD, BHEL SECTOR
A, BERKHEDA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT, INDORE THROUGH
4 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE M.T.H.
COMPOUND, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
INDORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH
5
COMMISSIONER INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ANIKET NAIK, DY. ADVOCATE GENERAL )
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for admission this day, Justice Sushrut
Arvind Dharmadhikari passed the following:
ORDER
Heard on the question of admission.
Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India in the shape of Public Interest Litigation praying
for the following reliefs:
(I) That, a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or
certiorari or as deemed fit be issued directing the Respondents to
change the present rail route/ line of the metro railways and lay it
in a fashion which is been mentioned in the writ petition.
The change should be that no right turn from the Bengali square
should be permitted so as to bring the rail line from Bengali
square to Palasia square and further onto Regal square,
INSTEAD the rail line should continue from Bengali square till
Pipliyahana square (also called as the World Cup Chouraha) and
then take a right turn there so as to join the square of Agriculture
College and then go underground to meet the Regal square and
then continue on the same path which is presently prescribed.
(ii) That, in case any permission/ sanction/approval is required
by the State Government from any Department of the Central
Government, the State Government should be immediately asked
and directed to seek such approval/consent/sanction from the
said department of the Central Government and till that happens,
no further action in pursuance of the present rail line be taken by
the Metro Rail Corporation.
(III) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the
interest of the public at large of the town of Indore, be passed.
(IV) That, a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or
as deemed fit be issued directing the constitution and forming of
a committee of technical experts coming from the relevant
departments with requisite expertise in the field, to consider the
viability, feasibility and advisability of the present route and the
proposed route(in this petition) and submit a report before this
Hon'ble Court based on their enquiry, testing and conclusion in
the matter.
This committee can be constituted of the following:
(1) Present or retired Professor from the stream of traffic
engineering, which is a post graduate course with specialization
in traffic problem and management.
(2) Head of the Department (HoD) from the stream of Civil
Engineering, which is a graduate and post graduate course.
(3) 1 or 2 Town Planners from the Indore Municipal
Corporation or Town and Country Planning Department.
(4) Present or Retired City Engineer from the Indore Municipal
Corporation.
(5) A social worker with impeccable reputation and credentials.
It is also prayed that a direction be issued to the respondents to
assist these technical experts in any manner, so as to enable them
in carrying out their task and abiding by the directions of this
Hon'ble Court.
2. The present petition has been filed by the society through its joint-
secretary and not by or at the instance of anyone. The cost of the litigation
which includes the advocate's fees and the traveling expenses of the
lawyers if any, are borne by and by the petitioner society exclusively.
3. The respondents State of Madhya Pradesh is represented through
Principal Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Metro Rail Corporation Limited
through its Managing Director, Traffic Department, Indore through its
Deputy Commissioner Traffic, Indore Municipal Corporation through
Commissioner. All the aforesaid are fall within the purview of State as
defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, therefore, amenable
to the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the grievance of
the petitioner is that the Respondent No. 3 is laying down metro rail lines
throughout the city of Indore. The routes laid down for the metro train has
been designed by the State Government without realizing that as far as
laying a track for the metro train till Bengali Chouraha is concerned, there
is no major problem. Once the metro line is laid from Bengali Chouraha to
Palasia Sqaure, thereafter, it goes underground by creating a tunnel and
passes through the High Court till the airport, which would cause complete
disruption of traffic and stopping of the lives of individuals who are living
and working in that area. Laying of such tracks is of no benefit or
advantage to the town of Indore, as very few people living in this area will
be connected through metro.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the
petitioner therefore is seeking a direction to the State to consider the idea
of extending the metro line from Bengali Chouraha to Pipliyahana
Chouraha (commonly called as World Cup Chouraha) and thereafter take a
right turn till the Agriculture College Square from where it will go beneath
the earth covering future District Court, M.Y. Hospital and AICTSL Bus
Station and subsequently will meet the original Regal Square and then
proceed to the airport according to the existing layout plan.
6. He further submitted that the aforesaid proposition is necessitated
because of the suggested new route would be advantageous in three
manners:
(A) The traffic of the main road from Bengali Chouraha to
Palasia square shall not be disrupted and not be troubled as the
speed at which the metro path is laid has always been under
questions and doubts and scrutiny by the authorities and the
public at large in any town.
(B) The vehicular moment problem and the problem of the
commuter will increase many folds if this metro line is to be
laid from Bengali Chouraha upto Palasia Chouraha and then the
metro rail goes down in a 30 ft wide tunnel 60 ft below the
ground from 80 ft above the ground at Palasia Square as the
same shall entail digging up of the road in a huge manner and
the whole traffic of the MG Road shall stand disrupted for a
period of more than two years. It is unimaginable to even think
about the town of Indore where no movement on the MG Road
from Palasia Chouraha till Regal Chouraha is permitted in as
much as there is no alternate vehicular movement plan or traffic
plan while fixing and planning the movement of this metro rail
project.
(C) That if the State Government slightly changes the metro
plan so as to take a right turn from the Pipliyahana Chouraha
(World Cup Chouraha) to the agricultural college, not only will
the MG Road stand undisturbed and unperturbed but more
people will be benefited by this line as that road has lesser
amount of traffic and therefore will entail lesser time to
construct and lay the metro line and as it covers the newly
developed 140 Scheme, District Court, AICTSL Bus Station
and MY Hospital, in the process more persons shall be
benefited by the newly laid metro line.
Hence this petition.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State
opposed the prayer and submitted that the petitioner has not given his
complete antecedents and have also not disclosed as to what public interest
work he has performed for the Society. Learned counsel for the
respondents has brought to the notice of this Court the judgment of the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Surendra Pratap Singh Vs.
State of M.P. and Others[2019 (1) M.P.L.J. 75] to contend that the
petitioner has failed to produce on record to satisfaction of the Court such
social work in last couple of years in the area in respect of which Public
Interest Litigation is involved. Merely spending money like lawyer's fees
from their own pocket does not satisfy test of locus standi. Therefore, this
writ petition is not maintainable.
8. The Division Bench of this Court in Surendra Pratap Singh
(supra), has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court involving Public
Interest Litigation in the case of State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh
Chaufal and others[(2010) 3 SCC 402] wherein the Apex Court has laid
down certain guidelines to be followed before exercising jurisdiction of
Public Interest Litigation. The guidelines are as under :-
(1) The courts must encourage genuine and bonafide PIL and
effectively discourage and curb the PIL filed for extraneous
considerations.
(2) Instead of every individual judge devising his own procedure for
dealing with the public interest litigation, it would be appropriate for
each High Court to properly formulate rules for encouraging the
genuine PIL and discouraging the PIL filed with oblique motives.
Consequently, we request that the High Courts who have not yet
framed the rules, should frame the rules within three months. The
Registrar General of each High Court is directed to ensure that a copy
of the RP 638/2017 Rules prepared by the High Court is sent to the
Secretary General of this court immediately thereafter.
(3) The courts should prima facie verify the credentials of the
petitioner before entertaining a PIL.
(4) The court should be prima facie satisfied regarding the correctness
of the contents of the petition before entertaining a PIL.
(5) The court should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest
is involved before entertaining the petition.
(6) The court should ensure that the petition which involves larger
public interest, gravity and urgency must be given priority over other
petitions.
(7) The courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL
is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The
court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive
or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation.
(8) The court should also ensure that the petitions filed by busybodies
for extraneous and ulterior motives must be discouraged by imposing
exemplary costs or by adopting similar novel methods to curb
frivolous petitions and the petitions filed for extraneous
considerations."
9. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in the present
petition as well none of the aforesaid guidelines are satisfied as laid down
in the case of State of Uttaranchal Vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal and
others (supra). Therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable.
Accordingly, the same is liable to be dismissed.
10. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.
11. This Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India is not in a position to act as an expert body, sitting in
the armchair of technical experts as to what should be the route of the
metro line and therefore the same cannot be the subject matter of judicial
scrutiny. We are of the considered view that the conclusion reached by the
experts particularly in the field of construction of metro line, Traffic
Engineering, Traffic Management, Urban Planning cannot be substituted
with our views. The interference in such matters, in writ jurisdiction would
be called for unless it is demonstrably perverse or illegal or contrary to
admitted facts. If the impugned decision is tested on the touchstone of
reasonable experts who have already planned the metro line after taking
into consideration various parameters and several factors. Even directing
constitution of the committee as proposed by the petitioner cannot be
passed. The decision taken by the consortium of experts cannot be
substituted with the view of this Court by examining the same or directing
the respondents to constitute a fresh committee.
Accordingly, this petition being bereft of merit and substance, is
hereby, dismissed at the admission stage itself.
(S.A. DHARMADHIKARI) (GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
Vatan
VATAN SHRIVASTAVA
2024.05.06 18:46:03 +05'30'
