BAIDYANATH PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Public Interest Litigation, the Petitioner seeks a direction to stay the construction work of drains at Katharkocha to Birca Chowk in the heart point of Ranchi and if the construction of drains is not stopped, the entire communication of general public of Katharkocha, Birsa Chowk will be badly affected due to blockage of road, since there is no alternative way to go out from the house of the tribal people. According to the case of the Petitioner, RRDA already sanctioned road construction from Birsa Chowk to Katharkocha but due to non-availability of N.O.C. from Railway authority, it was not completed. People of locality have represented before the Secretary, Railway Department, Government of India, but no action has been taken to construct the road. But suddenly, the authority started earth-cutting work for drain from Birsa Chowk to Katharkocha blocking the entire access of people of the area. Earlier petitioner had filed one W.P. (PIL) No. 4958 of 2004 and W.P. (PIL) No. 739 of 2005 and Cont. (Civil) Case No. 39 of 2007. Petitioner contends that if the road is not constructed, several people will be affected and, therefore, the writ petitioner seeks for direction to stay the construction of drains at Katharkocha to Birsa Chowk.

(2.) Respondents have filed counter affidavits on various dates stating that the railway line between Hatia-Ranchi runs through Katharkocha slum area near Birsa Chowk and a good portion of land of Railway is under illegal occupation of some people who have constructed slums and huts and there have been attempts to construct Pucca road over railway land parallel to railway line. This path is used by the slum dwellers. According to the respondents, previously there was no drain and the rain water accumulated around the place making the railway line unstable. There was always a danger of train accident due to soft earth under the track. Therefore, it was decided to construct proper drain for outlet of the rain water. The construction of drain is entirely on the railway land. The petitioner praying on behalf of unauthorized occupants of railway land settled in slums around the area is illegal and they cannot plan any construction over railway land. According to the respondents, the drain is dug only for draining the rain water and petitioner has got no legal right to question the same.

(3.) The petitioner has filed rejoinder denying unauthorized occupation of the land. According to the petitioner, they are living at Katharkocha, Birsa Chowk for a long time and used the road in question, Birsa Chowk to Katharkocha Road. The people of Katharkocha have constructed houses after getting permission from R.R.D.A. and the people of Katharkocha have also taken electricity connection and they are paying the electrical charges.