VINOD SINGH AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
WPIL/943/2025 · 2025-04-28
Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48530 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48530 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66552-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 943 of 2025 Petitioner :- Vinod Singh and another Respondent :- The State of U.P. and 3 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeraj Srivastava, Sandeep Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Sudhir Bharti, Ashish Mohan Srivastava, Nagendra Nath Mishra Hon'ble Arun Bhansali, Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra, J.
1. This petition purportedly in public interest has been filed by the petitioners seeking removal of illegal encroachment over the road constructed against the norms.
2. Submissions have been made that U.P. Road Side Control Act, 1945 (for short 'Act of 1945') and U.P. Road Side Control Rules, 1964 (for short 'Rules of 1964') provide that the construction can take place only 60 feet away from middle of the road. However, the impugned construction is being made within 60 feet from the middle of the road and, therefore, the respondents be restrained from continuing with the construction.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4, Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat made submissions that the drainage is being constructed by the Nagar Panchayat on the extreme side of the road and that the road, at the place where construction is being taken place, is not even 120 feet wide and, therefore, the plea raised in this regard, being totally baseless, deserves rejection.
4. Counsel for the petitioners made submissions that irrespective of the width of the road available, even a drainage for passage of storm water cannot be constructed within 60 feet from the middle of the road.
5. The plea sought to be raised is totally baseless. Once the construction pertains to drainage of the storm water, it has to take place within the available road, irrespective of the width thereof and, therefore, the plea raised, based on the Act of 1945/Rules of 1964, has no substance. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Sazia/SL (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad