W.P.(C) Nos.31606 & 31850 of 2023
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- T.R.RAVI
- Judgment Date
- 2024-04-09
- Court Decision / Holding
- No interference is called for in these writ petitions and the writ petitions are dismissed.
- Final Disposition
- Writ petitions dismissed, no interference with expert findings, and continuation of ongoing highway works.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Abdul Razak
- Firoz P
- Mohammed Fasil
- K.P Shereefa Basheer
- Shameer Kaladi
Respondents
- Union of India represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Transport Bhawan, 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi, PIN - 110001
- State of Kerala represented by its Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN - 695001
- National Highways Authority of India represented by its Chairman, G-5 & 6, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi, PIN - 110075
- Regional Officer, National Highways Authority of India, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN - 695024
- Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, VII/511-B, Neythelli-Mavelipuram Road, Kakkanad, Ernakulam, PIN - 682030
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Sri K.M. Sathyanath Menon
- • Ms.Ayisha
- • Sri P.A.Mohammed Shah
- • Sri Renoy Vincent
- • Sri Shahir Showkath Ali
- • Sri Chelson Chembarathy
- • Sri Abee Shejirik Fasla
- • N.K.Sri Muhamed Junaid V.
- • Sri Adith Krishnan U.
- • Ms.Fathima Afeeda P.
- • Sri Nabeeel Shah Ibrahim
- • Sri Shibu V.M.
- • Ms.Ayisha T.S.
Counsels for Respondents
- • Sri TC Krishna (CGC)
- • Sri Rajeev Jyothish George, Govt Pleader
- • Sri Krishna T C (CGC)
- • Sri Rajeev Jyothish George, Govt Pleader
Case Synopsis & Summary
These writ petitions challenge NHAI's works on National Highway 66 in Randathani, Malappuram, seeking relief for safe pedestrian crossing. The 31606/2023 petitioners Abdul Razak, Firoz P and Mohammed Fasil seek directions for an underpass at chainages 291.475, 291.700 or 291.309 on NH 66 for convenient crossing of residents and vehicular movement. The 31850/2023 petitioners K.P Shereefa Basheer and Shameer Kaladi seek a 3/4 metre pedestrian pathway under NH 66 at Randathani, as per Ext. P1 asset register. Earlier, the court issued interim orders prohibiting NHAI from shutting the existing path; later, interim orders were modified and vacated on 19.01.2024 after noting an underpass at 290.940. The respondents contend that since an underpass exists at 290.940 and another at 292.660, a further underpass at the proposed chainages within a short distance (roughly 369 metres from 291.309 to 290.940) is not feasible; the matter involves technical assessments by an expert body. The court, acknowledging its lack of technical expertise, deferentially upholds expert findings and refuses to interfere. Relying on Project Director, P.I.U. v. P.V. Krishnamoorthi & Ors. (2021) SCC 572, it dismisses the petitions. The operative order is to dismiss the writ petitions with no interference, maintaining the ongoing highway work.
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Doctrine of deference to expert bodies in technical matters; courts ordinarily do not interfere with findings of expert bodies.
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners in 31606/2023 seek directions for an underpass at chainages 291.475, 291.700 or 291.309 along NH 66 at Randathani for convenient crossing by residents and vehicles. The 31850/2023 petitioners seek a 3/4 metre pedestrian pathway under NH 66 at Randathani as per Ext. P1 asset register, arguing for preservation of pedestrian access.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents contend that there is already an underpass at chainage 290.940 and another at 292.660; the distance to the proposed site is about 369 metres, making an additional underpass at such short distance impractical. They emphasize reliance on expert bodies’ findings and note that after interim orders were vacated on 19.01.2024, works progressed. Courts should generally not intrude into technical determinations.”
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project Director, Project Implementation Unit v. P.V.Krishnamoorthi & Ors. | 2021(3) SCC 572 | Positive | Cited to support the principle that the findings of expert bodies in technical matters are ordinarily not interfered with by Courts. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against W.P.(C) Nos.31606 & 31850 of 2023 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.