HC raps railways, state for blocking landowner’s passage with underpass

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has castigated the railways and the State of Punjab for “total legal illiteracy, respect for citizen’s rights and preferring to flex their muscles against an aggrieved, who approached the court”.

The admonition came as the high court ordered the provision of an alternative passage or compensation within six months to landowner denied passage to his property due to an infrastructure project.

Declaring the conduct of the authorities as an infringement of constitutional principles under Article 300A, Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj also imposed Rs 6 lakh costs — Rs 5 lakh on the railways and remaining for the petitioner.

The Bench was hearing a petition by Sandeep Saini through counsel Dhivya Jerath for directions to the State and other respondents not to proceed with a railway underpass at Mauli village in Phagwara tehsil of Kapurthala district without considering their objections and in violation of the Land Acquisition Act.

Justice Bhardwaj observed that railways resorted to construction of the underbridge without basic prudence. “It is a classic case of mindless bureaucratic planning and hastened execution of an inherently flawed project to truncate rights of the citizens,” the court observed.

Justice Bhardwaj added even half an effort at reasoned and positive approach towards practical ground reality and challenges would have nipped the problem. The complete lack of acumen and rationality was heightened by arrogance to display sovereign power to complete the project “despite the issue being highlighted and the problem being pointed out in the writ petition”.

The authorities resorted to filing a “false affidavit” claiming that the project had already been inaugurated by a minister — a claim demolished by a local commission’s report. “The approach reflected high headedness and rigidity instead of wisdom to accept the flaw and make amends, thus, forcing litigation and harassment to a citizen,” the court added.

Justice Bhardwaj asserted that the Constitution guaranteed owners the right not to be deprived of their property without legal authority. Access to property was an integral and inalienable right. State action resulting in blockage or denial of an existing passage constituted unlawful deprivation of property rights and violated Article 300A.

“What further stuns the court is the refusal on the part of State instrumentalities to acknowledge lapse or admit liability despite being confronted. The state allowed NOC to raise construction against a public passage and has no solution even while alleging that the drawing has been changed later. The railways, on the other hand, have taken a stand that a straight underbridge is more feasible even without disputing that initial plan was a U-shaped underbridge and never chose to discuss the change with the field revenue staff,” Justice Bhardwaj asserted.

The court added such attitude and response of the authorities compelled this otherwise avoidable litigation. Rather, the problem was aggravated by fast tracking of the work “while gaining time on false pretext and false averments in the reply”.