ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) H. L. Gokhale, C. J. The petitioner is a resident of NOIDA. He has filed this petition in public interest, containing various prayers, which are princi pally to challenge the legality and validity of the Taj Expressway Project. It is a project where under six lane motorable corridor is to be constructed between GREATER NOIDA and AGRA.

(2.) WE have heard the petitioner, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava in person and Sri Jyotindra Misra, Advocate General with Sri O. K. Arora Additional Advocate Gen eral on behalf of Respondent No. 1-State of U. P. ; Sri Harish Salve, Senior Advo cate, Sri S. P. Gupta, Senior Advocate along with Sri Yashwant Varma, Advocate for Respondent No. 2-J. P. Group of Industries; and Sri Navin Sinha, Senior Advo cate along with Sri Ajay Bhanot, Advocate for Respondent No. 3-Taj Expressway Authority. WE have also perused the record. Pleadings between the parties have been exchanged and with consent of the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondents, this petition is taken on board for hearing and final disposal.

(3.) BEFORE entering into the merits of the case, we shall first proceed to deal with the preliminary objection raised by Sri Jyotindra Misra, learned Advocate General with regard to the locus of the petitioner to file this petition. It has been contended by Sri Misra that the petitioner cannot be said to be a person inter ested in the awarding of contract to any party and, as such, a writ petition at his behest would not be maintainable. The petitioner is a citizen residing at NOIDA. In our view, he has raised certain important questions with respect to this project, which are in public interest and as such his locus to challenge the same cannot be denied. This petition cannot, thus, be rejected on any such ground.