The Karnataka High Court has rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to halt further progress on the construction of a bypass road connected to National Highway-367.
Court’s Decision
A division bench comprising Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Krishna S Dixit ruled that halting the road construction would not be in the public interest. The bench emphasized that the requested directions fell within the domain of the Executive and thus cannot be granted through judicial intervention.
Petitioners’ Argument
The petitioners had argued that the Union Road Ministry had multiple bypass options but selected one passing through agricultural tube-wells and agricultural lands, which they contested.
Judicial Observation
However, the bench highlighted that decisions regarding road planning, layout, alignment, and design are within the purview of the Executive. It concluded that PIL jurisdiction cannot be used to substitute or control executive functions unless strong reasons exist.
Limitations of PIL Jurisdiction
The court underscored that PIL jurisdiction is not a remedy for all grievances and must be invoked only in cases involving violations of human or basic rights, particularly affecting marginalized segments of society. It emphasized that the court cannot usurp the role of statutory or executive authorities.
Conclusion
In dismissing the plea, the Karnataka High Court reaffirmed the limited scope of PIL jurisdiction, emphasizing its role in addressing violations of fundamental rights rather than substituting executive functions.
