Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

16. A statement as well as a counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent wherein it is stated that for the construction of an ROB in place of Level Cross No.22 at kilometer 41/128 in the Kuruppanthara yard of the Ernakulam-Kottayam Section, the land acquisitions are being carried out by the State Government, and the work is being undertaken by the Roads and Bridges Development Corporation of Kerala. It is the national policy of the Government of India to construct ROBs in place of level crossings once the Train-Vehicle Unit passes more than one lakh units. It is stated that every year, the Railways will advise the concerned State Government of the list of level crossings where the Total Vehicle Units exceed one 2025:KER:86 lakh. The work is undertaken by the Railways and the State Government in cost sharing basis of 50: 50. It is stated that a national policy has been formulated by the Government of India to eliminate all level crossings either by construction of ROB, Rail under Bridge etc., whichever is the feasible method. The Train-Vehicle Unit of Level Cross No.22 was 1,45,948 in the year 2021, exceeding the railway norm of 1.0 Lakh, making it eligible for an ROB as per the national policy of Government of India and railway safety policy. Accordingly, Level Cross No.22 is identified by the Railways and sanctioned for conversion into an ROB on cost sharing basis. The level crossing in a railway system is identified as an unsafe feature, and any accident at a level crossing is likely to be fatal and must be eliminated. It is further stated that, being a 2025:KER:86 level crossing in the station yard, the closure of gate will be more, and the precious time of the public will be wasted, which will be a national loss. Furthermore, any medical emergency vehicles heading to Kottayam Medical College or similar destinations will not be able to cross the level crossing, even in cases of emergency. The road over bridge already constructed was a reconstruction of the old bridge on the single- line track, rebuilt as part of the track doubling project to accommodate two tracks, approximately 300 meters north of this level crossing. Constructing a parallel road to the nearby ROB would require acquiring a significant portion of land, including houses, agricultural lands and shops, resulting in considerable expense and wastage of time by traveling the additional distance. Furthermore, it is stated that extra-strong barricades 2025:KER:86 will be necessary between the road and the track to prevent vehicles from accidentally entering the track. Further, junction improvements near existing ROB, would be required. ROB No.356, mentioned by the petitioners, was reconstructed as part of the railway doubling project. It is situated approximately 300 meters away from the subject level crossing and is located on a different road. The ROB at Kuruppanthara is being constructed in lieu of level crossing No.22 at railway Km 41/100-200 between Vaikom road and Kuruppanthara railway station. It is stated that it is the policy of the Railways to construct ROB/Road Under Bridge for elimination of Level Crossings on consideration of safety of public and maintenance/operation of Level Crossings and that the construction of the ROB is useful for the public for easy 2025:KER:86 movement without waiting at the level cross.

19. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 6th respondent, Manjoor Grama Panchayat. It is stated that the proposed ROB is highly required to ease traffic and for the development of locality and the 2025:KER:86 existing ROB can never be an alternative for the proposed ROB.

20. A reply affidavit is filed by the petitioners to the counter affidavits of respondents 3, 5 and 6. The petitioners have denied the averments made by respondents 3 and 5 regarding traffic in the area where the new ROB is proposed, stating that the heavy traffic density was due to the construction of the Manjoor ROB, which was completed in 2022 and the Train-Vehicle Unit assessment mentioned in the counter-affidavit of Southern Railway was conducted during the reconstruction period of that ROB. Referring to the averments in the counter affidavit of the 3 rd respondent, the petitioners state that since ROB No.356 was reconstructed as part of the track doubling project, the width of the ROB has been doubled and 2025:KER:86 the road over which the new ROB is proposed can be easily connected to the road where ROB No.356 is constructed. It is contended that the Panchayats and social organisations which passed resolutions and sent representations demanding ROB have no say in the matter.