Delhi High Court - Orders
Chandan Kumar Singh vs The Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 2 April, 2025
Author: Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela
$~86
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4103/2025, CM APPL. 19062/2025 & CM APPL.
19063/2025
CHANDAN KUMAR SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Petitioner-in-person with Mr. Rishesh
S. and Mr. Bibhash Kumar Sharma,
Advocates.
versus
THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR......Respondents
Through: Mr. Sameer Vashisht, Standing
Counsel (Civil), GNCTD with Ms.
Harshita Nathrani, Advocate for R-1
& 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
ORDER
% 02.04.2025
1. Heard the petitioner in person.
2. This Public Interest Litigation petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a direction to the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to construct a foot over bridge or underpass near the National Zoological Park ('Zoo') on Mathura Road.
3. Another prayer made in the writ petition is for issuance of a direction to the Public Works Department of GNCTD to maintain the earlier arrangements by making the traffic lights operational for at least 20 seconds at Sher Shah, Mathura Road inter-section.
4. The petitioner had earlier instituted W.P. (C) 16215/2024 with the said prayers. A Division Bench of this Court by means of an order dated This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/04/2025 at 00:17:02 22.11.2024 disposed of the writ petition with the direction to the GNCTD to decide his representation by way of passing a speaking order in accordance with law.
5. Pursuant to the said order dated 22.11.2024 the Executive Engineer (Civil) has taken a decision which is contained in a letter dated 06.01.2025 addressed to the petitioner. According to the said decision, the integrated plan was prepared by Government of India and approved by various departments of Government of India and GNCTD and accordingly, under the said plan, tunnels or subways, underpasses and foot over bridges were constructed to make Mathura Road DPS signal free stretch.
6. The said decision further states that under the plan two foot over bridges were proposed at different locations, one at Zoo Crossing and the other near gate no.6, Bharat Mandapam. The plan was submitted for approval for the authorities however the said proposal was refused with the suggestion to change the locations of foot over bridge and later on the foot over bridge was constructed at Zoo near (Petrol Pump) as approved by the Government Department looking to the need and feasibility of construction of foot over bridge.
7. It has also been stated in the said decision contained in the letter dated 06.01.2025 that rules and regulations do not permit construction of the foot over bridge at the desired location due to a structure being maintained by Archaeological Survey of India which exists in the proximity and accordingly, the Public Works Department of GNCTD has taken other safety measures on roads like providing zebra crossing rubble steps, studs and signages to avoid the accident while crossing the road by pedestrians' for their safety.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/04/2025 at 00:17:02
8. Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the said letter dated 06.01.2025 are extracted hereunder:
"Para 3 - The integrated plan was prepared by Govt. of India & approved by the various Departments of Govt. of India & Govt. of NCT of Delhi. Under the plan tunnel, subways, underpass. foot over bridge were constructed to make Mathura Road between W-Point to DPS signal free stretch. Under this plan FOB 's at 02 Nos. locations were proposed. One at Zoo crossing and second near Gate No.6 Bharat Mandapam. The plan was submitted for approval of DUAC, UTTIPEC. The Govt. Deptt., DUAC, UTTIPEC are responsible for such approvals, Proposal was returned with suggestion to change the locations of FOB & later on, it was constructed al Zoo (Near Petrol Pump) as approved by Govt. Department looking at the need & feasibility of the FOB.
Para 5 & 6 - Cautionary and regulatory sign boards have been provided for the benefit of pedestrian and motorists. Further FOB also exists at nearest feasible location for road crossing."
9. When attention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was drawn to the said decision contained in the letter dated 06.01.2025 wherein it has been stated that on account of existence of a protected monument, construction of foot over bridge could not be possible, he has stated that at least the traffic lights may be restored to as were functioning earlier.
10. The aforesaid aspect of the matter in our considered opinion are better left to the experts i.e. the planners. In the decision contained in the letter dated 06.01.2025, it has already been spelt out by the Executive Engineer concerned that earlier as per the plan two foot over bridges were proposed, however, such proposal was turned down and approval has accorded only for construction of only one foot over bridge which has been constructed at zoo (near petrol pump) as approved by the concerned departments of the Government looking to the need and feasibility of the foot over bridge.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/04/2025 at 00:17:03
11. The decision as contained in the letter dated 06.01.2025 further discloses that it is as per the approved planning that a particular stretch of road was made traffic lights free.
12. Having regard to the aforesaid decision contained in the letter dated 06.01.2025, we are of the opinion that as to whether a particular stretch of road is to be kept traffic lights free or as to whether at a particular point a foot over bridge is to be constructed are to be left to the experts, namely, in this case, the planners.
13. The planners on examination of the proposal for construction of two foot over bridges approved only one. Having regard to various aspects of planning and also the feasibility of the construction of foot over bridge, permission was accorded only for construction of one foot over bridge.
14. Similarly in case in the opinion of the planners a particular stretch of road is to be kept traffic light free, Court's interference in such a situation would be unwarranted.
15. For the reasons aforesaid, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition which is hereby dismissed.
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J APRIL 2, 2025 yrj This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/04/2025 at 00:17:03