Jutting-out wall not part of Rock Garden, UT tells high court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court was informed by the UT Administration that the jutting-out portion of the boundary wall causing traffic congestion near the High Court premises is not part of the Rock Garden. Instead, it serves as a divider between the forest area and the court complex.

Appearing before the Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel, UT senior standing counsel Amit Jhanji referred to a boundary map while informing the court that the wall would be demolished and straightened to create additional parking space by April 30.

The submissions came during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the holistic development plan of the high court complex. The petition’s scope, over a period of time, expanded to include issues such as the shortage of parking for lawyers and litigants, restricted entry and exit points, and the need for additional space by shifting certain court branches to Sector 17, Chandigarh.

The Bench, during the course of the hearing, “disposed of” an intervention plea by two citizens, Trilochan Singh Anand and Pallav Mukherjee. The court observed that the applicants were desirous of widening the PIL’s scope by including issues of urban planning and ecological conservation in Chandigarh, “which cannot be permitted, especially qua an intervener”.

“Trilochan Singh Anand and Pallav Mukherjee, who are respectable citizens of Chandigarh, are at liberty to approach this court by filing a separate petition making their prayer based on specific and relevant pleadings,” the Bench observed.

The Bench also took note of an affidavit by Deputy Conservator of Forests, Navneet Kumar Srivastava, addressing queries raised by the court in previous hearings. Providing historical details, the affidavit said the High Court building’s construction was completed in 1955 and Sukhna Lake was established in 1958.

The Bench also held that proceedings in another PIL did not bar the court from issuing fresh directions regarding the installation of green pavers in kutcha parking areas. The court clarified that the previous order dated November 10, 2022, merely recorded the UT Administration’s submission that it had already directed the Municipal Corporation not to install tiles, concrete pavers, or concrete tiles in green belt areas.

“Since there is no writ, order or direction issued by the Co-ordinate Bench on November 10, 2022, the order cannot come in the way of this Court, especially while passing the order dated February 7 inter-alia directing laying of green pavers in kutcha parking area,” the Bench observed.

The court also asked the Bar Association of Punjab and Haryana High Court to ensure the availability of adequate e-rickshaws along with drivers for commuters parking their vehicles in the additional parking zone behind MLA Punjab Hostel. The court observed that a common grievance among advocates was the lack of sufficient e-rickshaws for transport between the parking area and the High Court premises, causing inconvenience.