Read Time: 11 minutes
Court noted that the RRTS corridor had received government approval through a sanction order dated March 7, 2019. The priority section of this corridor was set to be operational by early 2023, while full commissioning was targeted for 2025
The Delhi High Court has recently dismissed a resident association’s plea against construction of Delhi-Meerut Regional Rapid Transport System (RRTS) through Siddhartha Extension.
The court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by Sidhartha Extension Pocket C Residents Welfare Association, voicing the collective concerns of the residents of Siddhartha Extension, New Delhi, their Resident Welfare Association, and Senior Citizens Welfare Forum, regarding the route alignment of the Delhi-Meerut Regional Rapid Transport System (RRTS).
A division bench of CJ Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula held that National Capital Region Transport Corporation (NCRTC) had strategically planned allocation of resources to expedite the completion of the project as swiftly as possible.
The bench also held that these were not merely preventive measures, but a proactive strategy aimed at safeguarding the general public from construction-related hazards and these measures demonstrated NCRTC’s conscientious approach to balancing the imperatives of public infrastructure development with the everyday lives and concerns of affected residents.
The RRTS, which was intended to establish a connection between Delhi, Ghaziabad, and Meerut, was built as a semi-high-speed rail corridor. The petitioners' complaint was related to the decision-making process around the RRTS's route alignment.
He argued that the authorities’ decision to abandon the initial route plan, referred to as Option 1, in favour of an alternate route, Option 3, was arbitrary, lacked proper justification, and posed adverse consequences for the well-being and quality of life of the residents.
The court noted that the RRTS corridor had received government approval through a sanction order dated March 7, 2019, the priority section of this corridor was set to be operational by early 2023, while full commissioning was targeted for 2025.
It opined that “the RRTS corridor was not merely a transport project, but also a significant initiative in environmental sustainability. Moreover, the RRTS was expected to contribute significantly to reducing pollution levels by augmenting the modal public transportation share, thereby decreasing the number of vehicles on the roads. Additionally, the efficient electric operation of the RRTS would further reduce both air and noise pollution”.
On perusal of the proposed potential alignment options for the concerned connecting line/viaduct, the court observed that the RRTS had undergone rigorous evaluation process by a team of domain experts and as per the evaluation, Option 3 not only minimizes the number of flats affected, but also presented a cost-effective approach when compared to Options 1 and 2. Options are:
“Importantly, the positioning of pillars in Option 3 had been carefully planned to ensure non-interference with roadways or other easement rights like parking and free spaces and it also minimized the impact on local residents by affecting the least number of flats and offered the most technically feasible and economically prudent route. Thus, the Court opined that NCRTC’s decision to forego Option 1 was anchored in valid technical and social considerations and the chosen alignment was not an arbitrary decision, but one steeped in technical viability, cost-efficiency, and broader societal gains”, it observed.
On the aspect of public interest, the court opined that “public interest stands at the forefront of this project, given its significant benefits such as reducing air pollution, alleviating traffic congestion, and offering a more efficient transportation system”.
Noting that the project promises substantial environmental benefits, as indicated by the Detailed Project Report, including significant reductions in annual emission rates of particulate matter, nitrogen oxide, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide,the court said, “Thus, in the act of balancing individual property rights and overarching public interest, the latter must take precedence. The scale tips in favour of a solution that serves the larger community, and ensures the most efficient use of public resources”.
On the aspect of safety measures, the court stated that NCRTC is not a novice in the field, but is a specialized government entity with extensive experience in executing complex and heavy infrastructure projects. They have a robust safety mechanism in place to monitor, supervise, and direct construction activities, which added an additional layer of assurance that construction would be conducted in a manner that prioritizes both safety and environmental concerns, court noted.
“NCRTC had demonstrated a commitment to mitigating the impact of construction on the well-being of Siddhartha Extension residents; they had devised a comprehensive approach to construction that would ensure speed and safety”, it added.
Court also noted that upon completion of the construction, NCRTC has committed to restoring the site to its original state, supplemented by modern amenities for the residents. This restoration will take place before the site is handed back to the respective governing agency.
Conclusively, the court held, that the NCRTC had strategically planned allocation of resources to expedite the completion of the project as swiftly as possible.
Furthermore, court held that these were not merely preventive measures, but a proactive strategy aimed at safeguarding the general public from construction-related hazards and these measures demonstrated NCRTC’s conscientious approach to balancing the imperatives of public infrastructure development with the everyday lives and concerns of affected residents.
Case Title: Sidhartha Extension Pocket C Residents Welfare Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Please Login or Register
