WPPIL/181/2020
2021 Latest Caselaw 85 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

          ON THE 08th DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
                       BEFORE:
       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA SINGH
                 CHAUHAN, C.J.
                         AND
        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE LOK PAL SINGH, J.


            Writ Petition (PIL) No. 181 of 2020

BETWEEN

1.   Harveer Singh,
     S/o Late Shri Chain Singh
     R/o Village Mohammadpur Jat,
     P.O. Gurukul Narsan, Tehsil Roorkee,
     Haridwar.
2.   Satyendra Kumar
     S/o Shri Surajmal Singh
     R/o Village Mohammadpur Jat,
     P.O. Gurukul Narsan, Thesil Roorkee,
     Haridwar.
                                       ....Petitioners

     (By Sri I.P. Gairola, Advocate)

AND:
1.   State of Uttarakhand
     Through Secretary, Revenue
     Secretariat Complex, Subhash Road,
     Dehradun.
2.   District Magistrate, Haridwar
     District Haridwar.
3.   Sub Divisional Magistrate, Roorkee,
     District Haridwar.
4.   Tehsildar, Roorkee,
     District Haridwar.
5.   Superintending Engineer,
     Civil Circle, Public Works Department
     Devpura, Haridwar.
6.   M/s Imran Khan Noor Mohd.
     Contractor
     R/o Village Mohalla Mirdgan,
     Mangalore, District Haridwar.
7.   Anant Pal Singh
                                    2
     S/o Sri Chatar Singh
     Owner of plot no. 197,
     Village Mohammadpur Jat,
     P.O. Gurukul Narsan,
     Tehsil Roorkee, Haridwar.
8.   Dhiraj S/o Brijpal Singh
     Owner of plot no. 178,
     Village Mohammadpur Jat,
     P.O. Gurukul Narsan,
     Tehsil Roorkee, Haridwar.
                                                  .... Respondents

     (By Sri Vikas Pande, Standing Counsel for the State
     and Sri Anshu Kumar, Advocate for respondent
     nos. 7 and 8)


            This writ petition (PIL) coming on for
hearing this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Raghvendra
Singh     Chauhan,         C.J.    delivered         the    following
Judgment:

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioners have filed the present PIL aggrieved as they are that a road which was sanctioned from Village Mohammadpur Jat from canal bridge through North towards Harchandpur Minor, a part of the said road namely, the portion of the road which falls in plot no. 198 is yet to be completed by respondent no. 5, the Superintending Engineer, P.W.D. Department.

2) The learned counsel for the State submits that that particular portion of the road cannot be constructed as people who have their land around that portion of the road are causing obstruction in completion of the construction. On the other hand,

learned counsel for respondent nos. 7 and 8, the private respondents, submits that they are the owners of plot no. 178. Although the road is supposed to be constructed in plot no. 198, the road has started encroaching in their plot no. 178. According to the learned counsel, the defect is that so far no survey on plot no 177, 198 and 210 has been carried out. Therefore, there is a confusion as to exact location where the road needs to be constructed. According to learned counsel, an attempt is being made to encroach upon the land belonging to the respondent nos. 7 and

8. He further submits that the father of respondent no. 7 had filed a civil suit. However, the learned civil court had declined to grant a temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff has filed an appeal against the rejection of the temporary injunction application. Simultaneously, the learned counsel suggests that if the three plots can be surveyed by the District Magistrate, through the Tehsildar, Roorkee, the position would become clear on the issue whether the road is being constructed in plot no. 198 or it has suddenly encroached upon plot no. 177.

3) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

4) It is, indeed, trite to state that roads are required by the public for their movement. Roads are the lifeline for the people living in the mountainous terrain. Therefore, it is imperative that the roads be constructed so as to permit the people the freedom of movement which is guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioners are

justified in claiming that the construction of the road needs to be completed as expeditiously as possible for the benefit of the public at large.

5) However, as there seems to be some dispute with regard to the issue whether the road is being constructed in plot no. 198 or has encroached upon plot no. 177, this Court directs the District Magistrate, Haridwar to direct the Tehsildar, Roorkee to survey plot no 177, 198 and 210 and to submit his report before the District Magistrate with a copy of the said report to be submitted to the Superintending Engineer, P.W.D. Once it is clear that the road is not encroaching on plot no. 177, but is passing through only plot no. 198, the respondent no. 5, the Superintending Engineer is directed to complete construction of the road within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the report filed by the Tehsildar.

6) With these directions, the writ petition (PIL) stands disposed of.

(Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

(Lok Pal Singh, J.)

Negi