Heritage vs flyovers: High Court Chief Justice asks if Chandigarh’s identity should be sacrificed for easing traffic

“The uniqueness of your city is only because of the heritage concept. If that goes, everything goes. The uniqueness goes. It’ll be like any other city.”

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court made the emphatic remark while hearing a matter relating to the proposed construction of a flyover at Tribune Chowk, questioning whether Chandigarh could afford to compromise its founding philosophy for the sake of easing traffic.

The Bench observed that the issue went beyond a single structure and touched the very core of what made Chandigarh distinctive. “The concept of the city is pitted against the traffic congestion. Now, which one do we give more prominence to and why? Which one is more important?” the Chief Justice asked.

The court cautioned that allowing even one such deviation could irreversibly alter the city’s identity. “Can we sacrifice the heritage concept because of some traffic congestion somewhere? Builders will come in, and they’ll construct multi-storey buildings. And the uniqueness of the heritage quality of the city will go,” the Chief Justice said.

Pointing to the cascading effect of such permissions, the Chief Justice warned: “This will be the beginning. If we allow a flyover there, then there’ll be another flyover this side — Punjab side — and there will be a demand for it at some other place also. Because the population is going to go up — if not today, maybe after 10 years, maybe after 20 years, 40 or 50 years. So do you want to preserve the heritage concept of your city, or not?”

The Chief Justice pressed for arguments by the UT on the principle of sustainable development, while observing: “Please argue on sustained development. There are judgments of the Supreme Court on that point — sustained development.”

The observations came after the Bench was – among other things - informed that the construction of flyovers was not recommended anywhere in Chandigarh, as such structures would disturb the city’s visual cityscape and inconvenience pedestrians. Reacting to this, Chief Justice Nagu sought clarity on how the pedestrian issues had been addressed in the proposed plans.

“What happens to the pedestrians? What is the solution? By proposing this new concept of flyover, how will you deal with the problem being faced by pedestrians?” Chief Justice Nagu asked while further enquiring whether the flyover enters the grid (city).

The Bench was told that the area under consideration was part of the 114-square-kilometre Chandigarh master plan zone. During the proceedings, the Bench observed that the Tribune Chowk was indeed one of the most congested areas in the city.

Senior advocate Tanu Bedi, assisting the court, pointed out that congestion was not limited to that spot alone. “So is the Manimajra lightpoint, so is the railway station, so is the Matka Chowk, so is Sector 15 — so the entire city will be flyover one day,” she said.

Referring to the larger planning context, Bedi asserted: “It is not heritage at all. A city, not only Chandigarh, any city in any country, in any part of India, is designed and developed as per master plan. The master plan does not recommend it. They are going on the lines of the engineering department — their own urban planning department — for whatever reason, they have totally disowned them. Some battles are not to be won, they just have to be fought. And we just want that our fight should be recorded in the order.”

Concluding the discussion, Chief Justice Nagu indicated that the matter would be decided without delay. “But we’ll decide it today. This way or that way, whatever,” the court asserted, while keeping the matter for further hearing later during the day.