Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1069 (PNJ)

Crown International v. State of Haryana

2012-08-14

HEMANT GUPTA, RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

body2012
Judgment Hemant Gupta, J. 1. The challenge is in the present writ petition is to the non-shifting of the Metro Station at Ajronda, Sector 15A, Faridabad, proposed to be constructed in front of the Crown Plaza Mall. 2. The petitioners acquired land for construction of the Shopping Mall in the year 1999 and was granted permission for change of the land use on 22.12.1999. In terms of the permission for change of the land use, the building plans submitted by the petitioners, were approved on 21.8.2002 by the Municipal Corporation with the stipulation that the petitioners will make arrangements for sufficient parking inside the premises. 3. Subsequently, at the request of the petitioners, the Floor Area Ratio was permitted to be increased with the stipulation that the petitioners will make provision for additional parking space for 168 cars within the premises. 4. The petitioners are said to have submitted a representation on 22.9.2011 alleging irrational location of the Metro Station in front Crown Plaza Mall, Ajronda. Since no action was taken on the said representation, the petitioners invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 5. The grievance of the petitioners in the writ petition is that if the Metro Station proposed to be constructed in front of the Shopping Mall of the petitioners is not shifted, the parking space required for the petitioners for parking of the vehicles in terms of the sanctions granted, will be jeopardized. But if the Metro Station is shifted, it will not cause any major alteration in the planning of the Metro station, but will facilitate the proper functioning of the Shopping Mall constructed by the petitioner. The petitioner has given the following two options:- “Option No.1:- The proposed Metro Station can be shifted towards Mathura side, starting from the ending of the open space of parking of the Mall. By this, the Metro Station would be shifted towards Mathura side and would not hamper any building as the land on the said side is vacant and of no use. Option No.2: The Metro Station can be shifted towards Delhi side upon the vacant land of factories, which factories are lying closed for the last more than 15 years.” 6. In pursuance of the notice of the present petition, the respondents Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited, has filed its reply. Option No.2: The Metro Station can be shifted towards Delhi side upon the vacant land of factories, which factories are lying closed for the last more than 15 years.” 6. In pursuance of the notice of the present petition, the respondents Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited, has filed its reply. It is pointed out that the Delhi-Faridabad New Metro Line is being constructed with the following 9 Metro Stations for the benefit of the public at large and especially for the daily commuters between Delhi and Faridabad:- i) Sarai Metro Station ii) NHPC Metro Station iii) Mewla Mahrajpur Metro Station iv) Sector 27-A Metro Station v) Badkhal Mor Metro Station vi) Old Faridabad Metro Station vii) Ajronda Metro Station viii) Faridabad New Town Metro Station ix) YMCA Metro Station. 7. The Metro Line is elevated i.e. on the pillars above the ground running almost parallel to the Delhi–Mathura Road. The Metro Station at Ajronda would be constructed over the green belt between the Mathura Road and the Service Road going towards Mathura and part of the parking area of the Crown Plaza Shopping Mall of the petitioners. The part parking area of Crown Plaza is required for construction of the Metro Station. The respondents have proposed to acquire a plot of 8600 square metres of land on the other side across of Mathura Road right opposite the parking area of the Shopping mall for providing for parking of about 370 cars i.e. more than existing parking area, with a Foot Over Bridge with other facilities on the station side as shown in the site plan annexed with the writ petition as Annexure R.2/1. The contracts for construction of all Metro Stations including Via-Duct of Delhi-Faridabad Line including Ajronda Metro Station have already been awarded to the contractor in the month of Feb/March/April with the completion period of 18 months i.e. by the year ending 2013. It is stated to the following effect:- “6. …….However, it is stated here that parking area of Crown Plaza is required for construction of the Ajronda Metro Station. There is no acquisition of main building of mall or any other structures. It is stated to the following effect:- “6. …….However, it is stated here that parking area of Crown Plaza is required for construction of the Ajronda Metro Station. There is no acquisition of main building of mall or any other structures. The detailed representation of the petitioners suggesting two alternate sites has been considered but the shifting of the Metro Station from the proposed site of Ajronda Station is not technically/ operationally feasible for the reasons:- i) that the location of stations have been finalized based on the survey conducted by experts keeping in view the technical, operational safety and ridership considerations. Any such move requires fresh survey and a lot of fresh ground work of survey, tree survey and subsequent tree cutting permission process, utility identification and approval of shifting scheme and real ground work. ii) that technically at this point of time shifting of location of any station will not be possible as the work at all the stations has already been started and as it will affect entire track design, signaling system design and traction scheme and safety. iii) that the Old Faridabad and New Faridabad Metro Stations have been planned on either side of Ajronda Metro Station at approximate 1300 meters on either side. If station is shifted on either side, it requires shifting of station by 300 metres due to entry road to other sector on either side of proposed station. The distance between the stations become unequal due to this proposal which is technically not feasible for train operation and safety and lot of inconvenience to metro commuters. iv) that the station designs have already been finalized, tenders have been floated and contracts have been awarded for construction of all the Metro Stations. The proposal of land requirements/acquisition and tree cutting permission has already been submitted to HUDA. The construction work has already been started at all stations of this line including Ajronda Metro Station. v) that it also involves acquisition of number of private shops/commercial buildings already existing at alternative sites (option 1) suggested by the petitioners and permission for tree cutting. The shifting of station towards Mathura Road is not feasible due to provision of flyover by NHAI (National Highways Authority of India Ltd.). v) that it also involves acquisition of number of private shops/commercial buildings already existing at alternative sites (option 1) suggested by the petitioners and permission for tree cutting. The shifting of station towards Mathura Road is not feasible due to provision of flyover by NHAI (National Highways Authority of India Ltd.). vi) that it also involves private land acquisition and dismantling of industrial/commercial buildings already existing at the alternate sites suggested by the petitioners (option II) and permissions for tree cutting. vii) This action will affect entire progress of work leading to abnormal delay in completion of project which will result into huge cost overrun of the important project and huge burden on public exchequer. viii) that keeping in view that the some parking space of the Crown Plaza Shopping Mall will come under the proposed Metro Station at Ajronda, DMRC has already planned and has got an area of 8600 square metres for parking facility of above/over 370 vehicles on the other side of the Mathura Road opposite the parking area of the Crown Plaza and FOB has been planned to cross the National Highway. The occupants of the mall can utilize this parking site for parking their vehicles and come to mall through unpaid area of station. ix) that DMRC will provide sufficient road access during construction to avoid inconvenience to mall users. x) that the entry to mall will not be blocked during and after the construction of the metro station construction as sufficient width of road has been planned between station and mall for Metro and mall users.” 8. The petitioners have filed a rejoinder wherein it is asserted that the provision of parking area was a pre-requisite for grant of permission of change of land use. With the proposed Metro Station, no parking area would be left. Thus, taking away the parking area would be detrimental to the basic norms conveyed to the petitioners. It is further denied that there is any technical or operational difficulty in re-locating the proposed Metro Station and that a fresh survey would be required to be made, cannot be a ground to deny the re-location of the Metro Station. It is pointed out that the reasoning that the distance between the Metro Station would become un-equal, is not tenable for the reason that the distance between the existing and proposed station is also not equal. 9. It is pointed out that the reasoning that the distance between the Metro Station would become un-equal, is not tenable for the reason that the distance between the existing and proposed station is also not equal. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and find no merit in the present petition. 10. Though the petitioners were granted permission of land use and as per the conditions, the petitioners are required to provide parking area within the premises, but such conditions cannot be made a tool to object the construction of the Metro Station at the proposed place. It is the categorical stand of the respondents that as against 4500 square meters, which is subject matter of acquisition, a plot measuring 8600 square meters is proposed to be acquired across the road. There is also proposal for construction of a foot over bridge with the other facilities for facility of the customers visiting Shopping Mall of the petitioners. 11. In view of the above, the argument that the parking area will not be available falls to the ground as much more parking area is being provided by the respondents on other side of the road with facility of foot over bridge. The respondents have given adequate reasons of not being able to shift the proposed Metro Station opposite the Shopping Mall of the petitioners. Such reasons have been reproduced in extenso in the preceding paragraphs. The reasons given cannot be said to be unwarranted or without any application of mind. The argument that the technically it is feasible to shift the Metro Station, is not acceptable for the reason that neither this Court nor the petitioners have the requisite expertise to examine the technical aspects, which is subject matter of experts of the respondents. Since the construction of Metro Station is for the larger public good and it serves the public purpose, the same does not warrant any interference in the writ jurisdiction by this Court. 12. In view of the above there is no merit in the present petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.