The Bombay High Court has recently issued notice to the authorities concerned, while hearing a PIL filed on the narrowing of an overbridge on National Highway 53.
The PIL has been filed by Yuva Shakti Manch and others. P.B. Agrawal, Counsel for the petitioners, contended that the width of the overbridge on National Highway No 53 is more but the width of the underpass on the highway, into which the overbridge merges, has a width of 22.5 metres.
According to the counsel for the petitioners, the result of this mismatch is that at the point where the overbridge meets the National Highway, the ramp of the overbridge narrows down, which, in his opinion, is dangerous for safety and security of the vehicles as also property and lives of the persons.
Such narrowing down of the overbridge on the National Highway is not permissible nor is it desirable if the authorities are very much concerned about the safety of the persons and their property, the Counsel added.
Counsel for the Petitioners has also referred to clause 7.3(ii) of 2014 Indian Roads Congress guidelines. The relevant portion of which is extracted as below:- “7.3 Width of Structures: Width of the culverts and bridges shall be adopted as below: i) …. ii) New bridges: a) All new bridges shall have a footpath on the left side of the traffic direction. The overall width of new bridges with a footpath on the left side shall be the same as the roadway width of the approaches…..”
The Nagpur Division Bench of Justice Sunil B. Shukre and Justice Anil S. Kilor, having considered the submission made on behalf of the Petitioners, directed that notice be issued to the respondents, returnable after four weeks.
Also Read: Copyright infringement case: Bombay High Court allows Just Dial to approach TDSAT against Indiamart
U. M. Aurangabadkar, Assistant Solicitor General of India, waived service of notice for the Union Of India.
At this stage, the Counsel for the petitioners pressed for interim relief regarding restrainment of the Union Of India and Ministry of Road Transport from constructing a new over bridge only at the location which joins the vehicle underpass from Nagpur side on National Highway No.53.
The Court is of the view , “that the work which is going on has been undertaken in the larger public interest and if any interim order, at this stage, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the respondents is passed, there is a possibility of the larger public interest being affected, inasmuch as we are sure that the respondents being the responsible authorities would also be conscious about the need for ensuring vehicular safety as well as safety of the passengers, pedestrians and all kinds of users of the road and therefore, during the interregnum, they would not take any such step as would have the effect of public interest being compromised.”