High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Parveen Kumar Etc vs State Of Haryana Etc on 27 November, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Parveen Kumar Etc vs State Of Haryana Etc on 27 November, 2008
C.W.P. No.20120 of 2008                                                 -1-


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

                                                   C.W.P. No.20120 of 2008
                                                   Decided on :27-11-2008

Parveen Kumar etc.
                                                                ....Petitioners
                     VERSUS

State of Haryana etc.
                                                              ....Respondents

CORAM:-HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH.

1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

-.-

Present:- Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

HEMANT GUPTA, J

The petitioners, residents of Village Taraori, District Karnal, have

invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for directing the respondents to

construct the Railway Bridge as per the original site plan Annexure P-1 and

not as per the changed site plan Annexure P-2.

After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, we do not

find any merit in the present petition.

In our view, it is for the respondents who have the necessary

expertise to finalise the location of the Railway Bridge. The location of the

Railway Bridge is dependent upon many ground level realities and the

feasibility. Therefore, the challenge to the location of the Railway Bridge

cannot be permitted to be disputed by the petitioners in the writ petiton.

The petitioner have been made a grievance that by construction of

Railway Bridge at site plan Annexure P-2, the access to Hospital, Fire station
C.W.P. No.20120 of 2008 -2-

and School shall be blocked. We find that such grievance of the petitioner is

based upon apprehension. The authorities are bound to provide access to the

civic amenities as well as to the residential localities, but not necessarily as

per the desire and wishes of the petitioners.

In view of the said fact, we do not find any merit in the present

writ petition. The same is dismissed.


                                                   (Hemant Gupta)
                                                       Judge


27th November 2008.                                (Nawab Singh)
Monika                                                 Judge