Bangalore citizens opposing the construction of the controversial steel flyover can breathe easy. For now, at least..The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) today informed the First Bench of the Karnataka High Court that it would not go ahead with the construction of the flyover, which was proposed in order to ease traffic in Bangalore. Contrary to various news reports, the BDA did not file any affidavit or undertaking in court..Hearing a writ petition filed by Namma Bengaluru Foundation, the Bench comprising Chief Justice SK Mukherjee and Justice RB Budihal had initially given BDA the go ahead in an order dated October 7. It was held,.“We feel that public projects of big magnitude should not be stalled by an interim order.”.The Bench also held that the implementation of the project could go on, subject to the result of the writ petition. However, the BDA has now decided to put the project on hold, after the southern bench of the National Green Tribunal last week restrained the civic body from constructing the flyover for four weeks..The petition highlights the opaque manner in which the BDA has gone about in implementing the estimated 1,350 crore project. The main concern is that the Bangalore Metropolitan Planning Committee (BMPC), a constitutional body, was not consulted with..Apart from this, public consultation was not adequately carried out. Suggestions from the public were invited nine months after the notification was issued, and as a result, the authorities received a mere 299 emails from citizens, 73% of whom were in favour of the construction..The Foundation has also contended that the BDA has not given any information as to whether the flyover will ease traffic at all. Moreover, there are concerns about the felling of 812 trees, damage to heritage sites in the area, lack of environmental clearances, and the actual cost of the project. The decision to construct a flyover made of steel rather than concrete is yet another issue..Senior Advocate KG Raghavan had initially appeared for the petitioner, who is now represented by Sajan Poovayya. On the other side, Additional Advocate General AS Ponnanna appeared for the state government, while Senior Advocate SS Naganand represented the BDA..The Court will now look into the constitutional aspects of the writ petition on the next date of hearing..Member of Parliament Rajeev Chandrasekhar, who spearheads the Namma Bengaluru Foundation, welcomed the development, saying,.“Yet again, it is the judiciary that steps into protect interests of city and citizens from an insensitive and apathetic government …This is a great boost for citizens of Bengaluru who have resolved to protect and nurture our city.”.Read the writ petition:
Bangalore citizens opposing the construction of the controversial steel flyover can breathe easy. For now, at least..The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) today informed the First Bench of the Karnataka High Court that it would not go ahead with the construction of the flyover, which was proposed in order to ease traffic in Bangalore. Contrary to various news reports, the BDA did not file any affidavit or undertaking in court..Hearing a writ petition filed by Namma Bengaluru Foundation, the Bench comprising Chief Justice SK Mukherjee and Justice RB Budihal had initially given BDA the go ahead in an order dated October 7. It was held,.“We feel that public projects of big magnitude should not be stalled by an interim order.”.The Bench also held that the implementation of the project could go on, subject to the result of the writ petition. However, the BDA has now decided to put the project on hold, after the southern bench of the National Green Tribunal last week restrained the civic body from constructing the flyover for four weeks..The petition highlights the opaque manner in which the BDA has gone about in implementing the estimated 1,350 crore project. The main concern is that the Bangalore Metropolitan Planning Committee (BMPC), a constitutional body, was not consulted with..Apart from this, public consultation was not adequately carried out. Suggestions from the public were invited nine months after the notification was issued, and as a result, the authorities received a mere 299 emails from citizens, 73% of whom were in favour of the construction..The Foundation has also contended that the BDA has not given any information as to whether the flyover will ease traffic at all. Moreover, there are concerns about the felling of 812 trees, damage to heritage sites in the area, lack of environmental clearances, and the actual cost of the project. The decision to construct a flyover made of steel rather than concrete is yet another issue..Senior Advocate KG Raghavan had initially appeared for the petitioner, who is now represented by Sajan Poovayya. On the other side, Additional Advocate General AS Ponnanna appeared for the state government, while Senior Advocate SS Naganand represented the BDA..The Court will now look into the constitutional aspects of the writ petition on the next date of hearing..Member of Parliament Rajeev Chandrasekhar, who spearheads the Namma Bengaluru Foundation, welcomed the development, saying,.“Yet again, it is the judiciary that steps into protect interests of city and citizens from an insensitive and apathetic government …This is a great boost for citizens of Bengaluru who have resolved to protect and nurture our city.”.Read the writ petition:
