Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 890 (GAU)

R. T. Tara & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

2014-09-18

A.K.GOSWAMI, K.SREEDHAR RAO

body2014
Petitioners claim to be residents of different villages in East Kameng district of Aruncahal Pradesh. The Government of Arunachal Pradesh sent a proposal to the ministry of Road Transport and Highways(MoRTH) for laying out a highway from Seppa to Itanagar via Sede Jollang, Nangyo, Chamte, Gumtung, Rasi, Devgola, Tangri, Hot, Palin, Dwola, and Pujirang villages. 2. It is stated that the above villages are very remote hamlets having no connectivity with the developed townships. The proposed road project was tendered on DFBOT(design finance build operate and transfer) basis. The tender of respondent 8 came to be accepted. Respondent 8 after survey had a series of consultations with the MoRTH and as well the Government of Arunachal Pradesh. After due deliberations, eighth respondent gave a design where under the national highway from Seppa to Itanagar to be connected to Sedde-Pakro segment. The final map pertaining to Sedde-Pakro segment came to be approved by the MoRTH. According to the final map the contemplated road in the proposal of the Arunachal Pradesh Government to go through the villages Sede Jollang, Nangyo, Chamte, Gumtung, Rasi, Devgola, Tangri, Hot, Palin, Dwola, and Pujirang came to be excluded. The proposed national highway is one of the segments of NH-229 connecting to Nechipu-Hoj segment. 3. The residents of the above villages who have missed the benefit of the national highway running through their villages filed this petition assailing the modifications of the proposals of the Arunachal Pradesh Government on the ground that the modifications have been effected at the behest of 8th respondent. It is stated that the proposed national highway between Sedde and Pakro does not take care of the dire transport need of the above villages which are contemplated to be included in the Plan proposed by the Arunachal Pradesh government, hence petitioners seek that the final map of the two-lane national highway from Nechipu to Hoj approved by the MoRTH should be set aside and direct respondents to build a 2-lane national highway pertaining to Sedde-Pakro segment as per the existing BRO road. It is further prayed that this Court to appoint a committee to supervise and inquire into the anomalies in respect of land acquisition and land compensation. It is further prayed that this Court to appoint a committee to supervise and inquire into the anomalies in respect of land acquisition and land compensation. It is the contention of the petitioners that the Arunachal Pradesh Government prior to sending its proposal to the MoRTH had acquired the needed land for upgrading the BRO road from Sedde-Pakro segment and to include the above said villages which are left out by the modified Plan. The amount of compensation has been assessed and deposited with the authorities for disbursement to the landowners. 4. The Arunachal Pradesh Government has filed an affidavit admitting that survey was conducted by the Government to upgrade the BRO road from Sedde-Pakro segment to make it a two-lane road and also to pass through the villages as stated by the petitioners. It is also admitted that lands have been acquired pursuant to the said proposal and compensation has been assessed and deposited with the authorities for disbursement to landowners. However it is stated that the MoRTH did not find the proposal of the State a feasible one. 5. The 8th respondent who is the tenderer for DFBOT submits that he had a series discussions with the MoRTH and as well the Government of Arunachal Pradesh and gave a separate design and the final map for the road between Sedde and Pakro, which is found more feasible by the MoRTH and the same is approved. It is said that there is absolutely no mala fide in the modification of the plan of building a highway between Sedde and Pakro as per its design. 6. The MoRTH has filed an objection-statement to rebut the contention of the petitioners; in paras 8, 11 and 17 of which the following averments are made. "8. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph 7 of the PIL, the answering deponent states that the villages mentioned by petitioners like Nangnyo village, Chamte village, Gumtung village, Rasi village, Devgola village, Tangri village, Hot village and Dwola village are not in the existing BRO road, which is misleading to this Hon'ble Court hence, by passing of above villages does not arise. However, the other three villages i.e. Sedde and Pijirang is already connected and Pallin village is connected by adjoining road and as such petitioners are approaching this Hon'ble Court with unclean and which is liable to be dismissed with cost. However, the other three villages i.e. Sedde and Pijirang is already connected and Pallin village is connected by adjoining road and as such petitioners are approaching this Hon'ble Court with unclean and which is liable to be dismissed with cost. Further, the final map approved by the answering deponent is after thorough survey done by the Concessionaire, Respondent No. 8 with design consultant to the TRANSYS CONCULTING PRIVATE LIMITED and after comprehensive meetings with the state PWD, Concessionaire and site Engineer hence, the same is not within the purview of PIL. It is pertinent to mention herein that the existing geometry in the BRO road is very substandard with zigzag and hair pin bend curves without any horizontal or vertical geometry. In this section of the existing alignment, there are 315 nos. of horizontal curves @ an average of 10 curves/km and an average degree of curvature is 1338 deg/km. These values shows that the geometry of the existing road is very substandard where it is impossible to develop/construct 2-lanning highway as per standard and specification prescribed by the planning commission of India therefore, the geometrical improvement through realignment is prepared in conformity with the standards and specification thereby reducing the curves in order to maintain nominal speed of vehicle. The answering deponent craves leave of this Hon'ble Court to furnish the copies of improved alignment, designed by the Tansys consulting private limited, which is voluminous and could not be annexed herewith. 11. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph 10 of the PIL, the answering deponent deny that the survey was initiated in the year 2008 by them and proposed to bypass the villages mentioned by the petitioners. The petitioners are in grave misconception with the tender process and work execution of normal NIT and DFFOT, the instant project i.e. DBFOT that is to say DESIGN, BUILD, FINANCE OPERATE and TRANSFER, which is based on i) Tender, ii) Award/Agreement, iii) Survey, iv) Design, v) Finance(20%) by the Concessionaire and (80%) by MORTH, vi) Operate and maintenance (17 years) and vii) Transfer whereas, in normal NIT(CPWD), i) Survey, ii) Drawing and Design, iii) Estimate, iv) Sanction, v) Tender and vi) Award. As such, in the instant case which is based on DBFOT, the tender was floated by giving notification dated 18/10.2010 and after scrutiny of the same, the Concessionaire/respondent No. 8 was awarded the work vide Concessionaire Agreement dated 19/11/2011 with a condition to hold survey and to design the same in conformity with the specification and standard prescribed in the National Highway Manual of the year 2007. 17. That with regard to the statement made in paragraph 16 of the PIL, the answering deponent states that the petitioners and some section of people putted tremendous pressure upon the state PWS, High Way Division due to which, many request was placed before the answering respondent, but the same was not considered for the reason that the project is to go with strict compliance with the standard and prescribed design of National Highway unlike the roads or rural design and specification".. 7. It is stated that the modified Plan for building the highway between Sedde and Pakro is drawn up on scientific considerations. The proposal of the Arunachal Pradesh Government to upgrade the Sedde-Pakro segment via the named villages proposed by the State is not a feasible proposition. The modified Plan has been approved. The allegations of mala fide are denied as false and untenable. 8. Respondent 8 in para 1(VI) of its counter-affidavit has given a table showing village, population and distance from the existing road followed by the reasons in para 9 in a tabular form that validated the modified Plan of the highway between Sedde and Pakro which are extracted below. Table 1 Name of village Chainage Population Peripheral distance from the take-off points i.e. the existing road. Ekwa/Sede 127.23 497 On existing alignment Nigyo 129.93 67 1.0 km from existing alignment. Chamte 129.93 64 12.00 km from existing alignment. Gumtung 129.93 161 15.00 km from existing alignment. Rasi 129.93 30 17.00 km from existing alignment. Hote Veo 129.93 100 20.00 km from existing alignment. Debe Gollo 129.93 183 18.00 km from existing alignment. Tengri 129.93 36 22.00 km from existing alignment. Palin 130.13 94 On existing alignment. Pijirang 139.53 Nil On existing alignment. Attribute Existing alignment Approved realignment Connectivity Sede, Nigyo, Palin, Patiwa, Veo, Taroyar, and Pakro villages. All villages are connected including Palin with adjoining road. Terrain Steep Rolling Speed(Km/h) 25 Km/h 50/65 KM/h Horizontal geometry Serpentine, 315 curves Smooth, 55 curves Gradients Steep at isolated locations. Palin 130.13 94 On existing alignment. Pijirang 139.53 Nil On existing alignment. Attribute Existing alignment Approved realignment Connectivity Sede, Nigyo, Palin, Patiwa, Veo, Taroyar, and Pakro villages. All villages are connected including Palin with adjoining road. Terrain Steep Rolling Speed(Km/h) 25 Km/h 50/65 KM/h Horizontal geometry Serpentine, 315 curves Smooth, 55 curves Gradients Steep at isolated locations. Smooth. Cum. rise and fall 1090 m. 404 m. 9. Upon hearing the petitioners and the respondents it emerges from the facts and the material that there appears to be no mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the MoRTH in accepting the proposed plan to build a highway between Sedde and Pakro as per the design given by respondent 8. The Government of Arunachal Pradesh also does not attribute any motive for the proposed plan for executing the construction of a highway between Sedde and Pakro as per the Plan of the 8th respondent. In the affidavit of 8th respondent it is stated that the villages Sedde, Nigyo, Palin, Patiwa, Veo, Taroyar, and Pakro have connectivity with the BRO road and the highway to be built as per the proposal sent by the State to cover the villages as stated by the petitioners is not feasible because it is a steep terrain and the speed of vehicles despite building a highway would not be 25-kilometre per hour and there would be 315 serpentine curves and the inclines and declines on the highway would be around 1090-metre. In the approved realignment of the said villages named by the petitioners, which are said to be excluded, do have connectivity with the highway through the BRO road the terrain would be rolling and the speed of vehicles will be around 50-65-kilometre per hour and serpentine curves would be reduced to 55 curves as against 315 serpentine curves and the inclines and declines would get reduced to 404-metre as against 1090-metre. Keeping in view the safety standard of a National Highway, the approved Plan has been designed and the North and as well the Government of Arunachal Pradesh found the Plan more feasible. Therefore on scientific considerations the projects suggested above have been approved. Hence there is no merit in the PIL seeking setting aside of the approved Plan. 10. In view of the above said reasons we find that the PIL lacks merit for granting relief of setting aside the approved Plan. Therefore on scientific considerations the projects suggested above have been approved. Hence there is no merit in the PIL seeking setting aside of the approved Plan. 10. In view of the above said reasons we find that the PIL lacks merit for granting relief of setting aside the approved Plan. However we notice that there appears to be a dire need for improving the BRO road existing in the named villages in order to have better connectivity with the townships and as well to the approved highway between Sedde and Pakro. The Arunachal Pradesh Government did feel the necessity of improving and upbringing the BRO road as a national highway and sent the needed proposals to the North. The State has also acquired lands for widening the BRO road and compensation has been assessed and deposited with the authorities for disbursement to landowners. Therefore it is directed that the Arunachal Pradesh Government shall widen the BRO road as per its proposal sent to the MoRTH to make it more convenient and to provide better connectivity with the townships. 11. The counsel for the petitioner in course of argument pointed out at annexure 10, a proposal given by the Chief Engineer, PWD(Highway Division), Arunachal Pradesh while resolving the dispute between villages for construction of a straight road from Dwola to Patiwa to connect to the modified approved national highway. It is stated that if the said proposal is carried out and the quality and width of the BRO road running through the above villages would be improved as per the proposal of the State and the proposed road between Dwola and Patiwa and the modified road are constructed it would fulfil and cater to the needs of the residents of the villages who have missed the benefit of having a national highway. In this regard it is directed that the Government of Arunachal Pradesh to take up the project and construct the road as per its proposals sent to the MoRTH within a period of two years. The State of Arunachal Pradesh shall complete the said road project simultaneously with the Sedde-Pakro approved road, which is required to be completed by 8th respondent. Accordingly the interim stay granted shall stand dissolved. 12. The PIL is disposed of in the terms indicated above.