High Court · 2012

Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. P. Deka, l earned counsel for the petitioners as well as Ms. R. Borah, learned CGC. All the writ petitions raising the same issue have been heard together a nd are being disposed of by this common order. For a ready reference, the facts stated in W.P.(C) No. 10423/2003 are taken consideration. The petitioner is the owner of a plot of land measuring 1 Bigha, 1 Katha and 12 Lecha covered by Dag No. 513 comprised of Periodic Patta No. 76 of Villa ge Moidan, Mouza Beltola, Kamrup, Assam. The said plot of land is adjacent to Na tional Highway No. 37 and the frontal facia of the said plot land is facing Nati onal Highway 37. As such the only thoroughfare to the aforesaid plot of land is directly from the National Highway 37. Above is the position in respect of the lands belonging to the petitione rs in other writ petitions with different Dag numbers and Periodic Patta numbers only. All the petitioners are running their fuel stations from the respective p lots of land. When widening of National Highway was undertaken, it was their ap prehension that their approach road to the National Highway would be blocked ser iously telling upon their business as the same would cause obstruction in the ea sy throughfare of vehicular traffic to the fuel stations. The prayer made in the se writ petition is as follows: (cid:28)In the premises aforesaid the petitioners pray that Your Lordships may be pleas ed to call for the records, issue Rule calling upon the respondents show cause a s to why a writ in the nature of mandamus be not issued directing the respondent s to act in accordance with law and not to close/block the existing approach roa d from the National Highway No. 37 to the petitioner’s plot of land covered by D ag No. 513 and comprised in Periodic Patta No. 76 of village Mouza Beltola in th e district of Kamrup in any manner whatsoever and/or why such or further order(s ) should not be passed so as to give full relief to the petitioner and on cause or causes being shown and after hearing the parties make the Rule absolute and/o r pass such other order(s) as to Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the f acts and circumstances of the case. AND During the pendency of the Rule be further pleased to direct the respond ents to act in accordance with law and not to close/block the existing approach road from the National Highway No. 37 to the petitioner’s plot of land covered b y Dag No. 513 and comprised in Periodic Patta No. 76 of Village Modian Mouza Bel tola in the district of Karmup in any manner whatsoever and/or pass such other o rder (s) as to Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumsta nces of the case. (cid:29) While entertaining the writ petition by order dated 23.12.2003, an inter im order was passed with the direction that status quo as was on that date, shou ld be maintained by the parties in respect of the approach road to the petitione r’s petrol pump located in the aforesaid land. Although liberty wa given to the respondents to move this Court from modification/alteration/cancellation of the said interim direction, no such application has been filed. However, the respond ent National Highway authority has filed its counter affidavit justifying its e xplanation. It is their stand that while doing so, no obstruction has been put to the approach road of the petitioner’s land. In paragraph 22 of the counter af fidavit it has been stated thus: (cid:28)22. That with regard to the averments made in paragraph 17 & 18 of the writ pe tition the answering deponent begs to submit that this Hon’ble Court will kindly take note of the greater interest of the Country and greater benefit of general public which is likely to emerge from the implementation and completion of the project as undertaken by the answering deponents. In the premises aforesaid, the answering deponent begs to submit that fo llowing for kind consideration of this Hon’ble Court. (a) That the aces to the petitioner’s property has not been closed as alleged an d is still existing from the highway via a service road of 7.5 mt. i.e. 25.35 fi t. width and as per the aforementioned design and plan as submitted with this af fidavit-in-opposition it is likely to remain so even after completion of widenin g works of NH-37. (b) There has been no restriction imposed on the writ petitioner from carrying o ut his business by the NHAI authorities. (c) The respondents have the legal and proprietorial right to take up any develo pmental work within lands and areas which has been specifically carmarked and se ttled in favour of the respondent NHAI authorities. In paragraph 15 of the counter affidavit the respondents have stated tha t the approach road to the petitioner’s property is still existing to the servi ce road which leads and connects to the land carriage way. It has also been stat ed that gateway between the main carriage way and the service road is available at a distance of about 200 meters. The respondents have also denied that there i s discrimination in the matter of maintaining such distance. In the said affidav it, the respondents have also highlighted that the petitioner’s petrol pump is n ot the only station on the stretch of NH-37 from 156.000 km. to 163.895 km. of the Highway and that there are five other petrol pumps and all these stations ar e also going to have their approach to the main carriageway of the Highway throu gh the service roads. In the affidavit in reply, the petitioners have denied that the responde nt authority has maintained uniform distance between the main carriageway and th e service road. By filing an additional affidavit on 19.11.2012, the petitioner has also brought on record the dilapidated condition of the service road. In fac t, the picture/photographs annexed to the said affidavit show that the service r oad is in a very dilapidated condition. It is in the above backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent NHAI should maintain the approach road to the respective pl ot of lands/fuel stations of the petitioners for easy vehicular traffic. Considering the matter in its entirety, all the writ petitions are dispo sed of with the following directions: (i) As per the own undertaking of the respondent, the approach road to the each one of the fuel stations should be maintained by the NHAI. (ii) The service road should be maintained making it hygienic and usable by the vehicular traffic. (iii) Unnecessary parking should not be allowed in the service road and to the a djacent location of the Highway. With the above direction, all the writ petitions are disposed of.