PWD Cannot Permit Construction On The Road Margin On A State Highway Or A Major Highway: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that the Public Works Department (PWD) cannot permit construction on the road margins of a state or a major highway.
The Court disposed of a set of Writ Petitions wherein the PWD allowed a private entity to construct a Milk Parlor through private negotiations on the road margin of a highway.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj observed, “Hence, I answer point No.1 by holding that the Public Works Department cannot permit construction on the road margin on a State Highway or a Major Highway”.
Advocate N.S. Sriraj Gowda appeared for the Petitioners, and Additional Advocate General Naveen Chandrashekhar appeared for the First, Third, and Fourth Respondents. Advocate Sharanjith Shetty K. appeared for the Second Respondent, Advocate H.V. Devaraju for the Fifth and Sixth Respondent, and Advocate Nagaraja Hegde for the Seventh Respondent.
The Petitioners claimed ownership of a property that had a road called Gurupura Kaikamba to Bajpe Airport Road, separating it from the road margin. Respondent No. 2, the Grama Panchayath, tried to construct a structure in front of the neighboring property, but an injunction was granted due to objections from the Petitioner's neighbor. However, the Seventh Respondent sought permission from the Third Respondent to construct a Nandini Milk Parlor in front of the Petitioners's property and was granted permission by the Managing Director of D.K. District Milk Union Limited, despite objections and legal notice from the Petitioners. The construction blocked access to the Petitioners' property and caused harm and injury.
A set of Writ Petitions were filed challenging the notice passed by the Third Respondent (Panchayath Development Officer/ PDO) and challenged the license granted by the Fourth Respondent.
The Court noted, “The points that would arise for consideration in the present matter are;
1. Whether the Public Works Department can permit construction on the road Margin of a State Highway or a Major Highway?
2. Whether a private person can put up construction of a Milk Parlor on the road margin without allotment of land and without sanction of plan?
3. What order?”.
The Court noted that the PWD is responsible for State highways, major roads, and adjacent road margins. Any construction near these roads must comply with building line requirements, meaning that the width and extent of the building line must be maintained without obstruction. The Court observed that this obligation applies to private parties and public authorities. Public authorities must follow applicable laws so that private parties can do the same. The Court noted that the PWD can only permit construction on any property with approval from the Municipal Authority for building plans. Even if the department permits a private party to construct, the party must obtain necessary plan sanctions and building licenses.
“Thus, looked at from any angle, the Public Works Department cannot by itself sanction or allot a road margin area to any private party for putting up of construction of any nature including construction of Nandini Milk Parlor even if such construction is for public convenience. Furthermore, no construction can be put up anywhere much less in the road margin area without obtaining a sanction of plan for such construction as also building license”, the Court observed.
The Court noted that a public entity is prohibited from engaging in private negotiations or giving preferential treatment to a specific private individual for the allocation of land. Additionally, the Court observed that the PWD allowed a private entity to construct a Milk Parlor through private negotiations. However, there was no tendering of the land for auction in favor of this private individual, nor was there any plan sanction for the construction.
“In that view of the matter, I answer point No.2 by holding that the no private person can be allotted any land without complying with the Transparency Act and bringing the property for auction. The allotment could be made to the successful bidder who thereafter would have to obtain necessary plan sanction and building license for construction”, the Court emphasized.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Petition and quashed the license
Cause Title: Severine Lobo v The State of Karnataka
