The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday ruled that the construction of a flyover was impermissible in Chandigarh under the Master Plan-2031 [Jagwant Singh Bath and others v Union of India and Others].A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry passed the judgment on a petition challenging construction of a flyover at Tribune Chowk in Chandigarh over environmental concerns.The Court had earlier restrained the Union Territory (UT) from felling any trees in the vicinity of Tribune Chowk. Today, the Court ruled against the project and restrained Chandigarh Administration from proceeding ahead with the construction of the Tribune flyover.However, the Court said that the Chandigarh Administration is at liberty to construct an underpass as Tribune Chowk as same was permissible under the Master Plan. "The pristine environment in mind, with which Chandigarh city was planned and established, ought not be forgotten. Sun, Space and Verdure (fresh, green color of growing vegetation, or lush plant and foliage themselves), which are hallmark of this city, need to be protected and preserved at all costs," the Bench said..The Court went on to prohibit the authorities from cutting any mango tree or any other tree standing in and around the Tribune Chowk."The Court further directs the UT Administration to maintain the green, unique and heritage status of Chandigarh town, including Phase I comprising of Sector 1-30, including Dakshin Marg which forms an integral part of Phase I (Sectors 1 to 30) (heritage sectors)," the Court ordered.The Court also directed the UT Administration to ensure and encourage the original ambience and character of Chandigarh city by minimising private motorised traffic and instead promoting public transport..We hope and expect, rather pray to God, that concept of Sun, Space and Verdure would be preserved by the respondents, by not constructing the flyover at Tribune Chowk in violation of CMP – 2031.Punjab and Haryana High Court.The Court observed that Chandigarh was the last well-planned city of India and needs to be preserved and protected. It added that as per the foundational concepts with which the city was built, pedestrians and cyclists were required to be given preference over the motorized traffic.However, it said that the increase in the number of motor vehicular traffic in Chandigarh was alarming."There are more number of motorised vehicles in Chandigarh than people residing in this city," the Bench said..Advocate Tanu Bedi appeared for the petitioners.Senior Advocate Amit Jhanji represented the Chandigarh Administration.Senior Advocate Dheeraj Jain appeared for the Union of India.[Read Judgment]
