Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Divya Singh vs Union Of India on 9 April, 2021
Bench: Indrajit Mahanty, Vinit Kumar Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 204/2021
Divya Singh S/o Natwar Singh, Aged About 21 Years, Caste
Rajput, Resident Of Village Post Bitthuja, Tehsil Pachpadra,
Barmer.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road
Transport And Highway, Government Of India, Transport
Bhawan, 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110001.
2. National Highway Authority Of India, Through The
Chairman, Government Of India, G 5 And 6, Sector 10,
Dwarka, New Delhi 110075.
3. Land Acquisition Officer Cum Sub District Magistrate,
Balotra.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Dr. Kshamendra Mathur, through
video conferencing on "Cisco Webex
App"
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Rekha Borana, AAG with
Mr. Saransh Viz
Mr. Navneet Singh Birkh for
Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, ASG
Mr. Ankur Mathur, NHAI
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE INDRAJIT MAHANTY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
09/04/2021
The present Special Appeal has been filed against the
rejection of the second stay petition preferred by the appellant
before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge
dismissed the second stay petition of the appellant vide order
dated 25.02.2021 in the following terms :-
(2 of 3) [SAW-204/2021]
"Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that nay such curve shall be detrimental to the
road safety, which is being created by the
respondents.
On the other hand, learned counsels for the
respondents assure this Court that all reasonable
experts in the matter have been consulted, who in
their report, opined that straightening of the curve
in question is not possible, and thus, such curve is
unavoidable.
Learned counsels for the respondents however,
seek some time to complete their instructions and
to file a detailed reply to writ petition.
In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to
pass any order in regard to restraining the work of
the Highway Project, which is a public project.
Consequently, the second stay petition as well as
the first stay petition are dismissed. However, if the
law provides for any kind of water channels on or
below the surface, if required in the present
location, the same shall be appropriately
considered by the respondents within a period of
sixty days from today strictly in accordance with
law."
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that because of
the curve in the highway road which is being constructed under
the Bharatmala Scheme, some of the structures existing on the
land of the appellant are being demolished. He, therefore, prays
that the respondents may be directed to adjust the construction of
the road in such a way that structures of the appellant may be
preserved from demolition by adjusting the alignment of the road.
We have considered the submissions made at the Bar and we
are of the view that since it is a project of national importance and
the alignment of the road has been done by the expert bodies
after taking appropriate survey and contour of the area on which
the road is being constructed. The alignment of the road cannot
be changed just to preserve some of the structures existing on the
(3 of 3) [SAW-204/2021]
land belonging to the persons like appellant. Since, it has already
been observed by the learned Single Judge that the respondents
have given assurance that the reasonable experts on the subject
have been consulted and they have opined in the report that
straightening of the curve in question is not possible, and
therefore the curve is unavoidable.
In the wake of the expert opinion, we are not inclined to
interfere in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The appeal being bereft of merit is, therefore, dismissed.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J (INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ
118-/Praveen/Vivek/Sunil/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
