MANJU PALOD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed the present petition in the shape of public interest litigation in order to install the construction of Durg bypass road which is part of National Highway No.6. Payer has been made in the petition to quash the agreement for construction of Durg bypass road. It is the further prayer made that demarcation has not been properly done and there are deviations made and costruction of service roads on both sides of Durg bypass be directed. The Petitioners have averred that instead of constructing Durg bypass on acquired land it has been shifted on private lands. The project was started on 5.11.1997. The writ petition has been filed in the year 1999. It appears that there was some demarcation dispute raised. It is further averred that petitioner no.1 and 2 own Maheshwari Resort and Health Club Private Limited and material has been dumped in such a way that their business activities have been adversely affected. The petitioners assert their ownerships on certain portions of land mentioned in para 5.9 of the petition. It is further submitted that petitioner no.23 participated in demarcation of land done by respondent no.12. It appears that there is some dispute about the demarcation between the parties. It is further averred that construction in the bypass is in full swing and respondent no.3 contractor is creating hinderance for those persons particularly the petitioners who are either residing or cultivating their fields, or constructing complexes on both sides of Durg bypass. It is further alleged that Maheshwari Resort and Health Club Private Limited have constructed resorts, restaurants, swimming pools, water spot, etc. But in order to blackmail and extract money from the promoters, respondent no.3 has dumped huge building material on service roads of Durg bypass due to which the public is unable to approach the resort and water -world complexes and because of this the project is suffering huge financial losses.

(2.) FROM the averments made it appears that the petition has been designed to cater the individual interest in the guise of serving public interest. The construction activity is in full swing from 1997. The petition has been filed in the year 1999. While bypass is being constructed some inconvenience is bound to be faced by the local inhabitants, but merely for that reason it cannot be said that public interest work of bypass construction should be obstructed or hindered, though it is expected that the respondents shall construct the road causing least inconvenience to the inhabitants of the locality. However, such inconvenience, if any, is only a temporary phase and has to be shared. We find no public interest involved in the present petition. Dispute about demarcation cannot be a subject matter of writ petition. There is no substance in the present writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.