HC allows amendment of PIL against steel flyover at Shivananda junction

The petitioners now want to challenge the government’s decision to reject their objection to the project

November 09, 2017 09:00 pm | Updated November 10, 2017 09:08 am IST

A view of Karnataka High Court

A view of Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday permitted a group of petitioners to amend their PIL petition enabling them to question the October 31 decision of the State government rejecting their plea for cancelling the steel bridge project at Shivananda junction.

A Division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice H.G. Ramesh and Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar passed the order after petitioners' counsel told the court that the Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development Department, who examined their representation on October 31, rejected their plea against the project.

However, the bench declined stay the project till the petition is amended while observing that the structure can be pulled down if they are not of the prescribed standards. Further hearing has been adjourned.

Non-consideration of representation

As the present PIL had questioned only non-consideration of their representation despite an earlier direction of the court, the bench had directed the State to take a decision by November 2.

The ACS (UDD), who had examined both written and oral arguments on behalf of the petitioners, had rejected their objections while pointing out that the project is for the public good and to ease traffic congestion. The ACS had also said that every infrastructure project does not require approval of the Metropolitan Planning Committee before implementation.

The BBMP has, however, undertaken to place the project before the MPC in the next meeting, the ACS has noted.

The ACS, however, had advised the BBMP to approach railways authorities for remodelling of a railway underpass, mitigate the hazard of sound pollution by providing sound barriers, provide proper drain and pumping mechanism under flyover for likely water logging, explore the possibility of reducing gradient of rap, and to explore pruning or transplanting of trees before resorting to cutting.

Among other claims, the petitioners have alleged that the design of the flyover is not as per the standards prescribed by the Indian Road Congress.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.