SC Overturns Motion To Plead Guilty For Suspension Of Construction Of The Flyover From Dwarka To Delhi HC

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Case: Rao CGHS vs National Highway Authorities of India & Ors
• The Supreme Court cancelled application to suspend construction of Dwarka overpass in Delhi HC.
• The environmental permit was asked which would let the authorities assess everything that allowed NHI all the legal as well as illegal activities under the disguise of “national importance”.
• It was also argued that the making of the highway would create unnecessary noise and the amount of deforestation would occur on a very huge level.
• Prosecutor Anand Verma submitted this petition.

CASE BACKGROUND

• On Friday, the Supreme Court rejected a petition against the construction of a national highway in Dwarka for the construction of an overpass in a residential area believed to have no environmental permits.
• The court, composed of Judge D.Y. Chandrahud, Judge Vikram Nath, and Judge Khima Kohli, found that it could not consider an existing application for special authorization filed by order of a single court when patent appeals could be upheld in the District Court of the Supreme Court.
• The court wrote that as a letter patents appeal could be upheld against the sole academic judge's decision in the Section 226 petition, the Court could refuse to accept the Special Leave Petition.
• According to the plaintiffs, the procedure for considering disputes contradicts the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of the Project Director, the Project Implementation Committee v. P.V.Krishnamurti, whereby the court ruled that although the central government did not require an environmental permit before expressing its intention to buy any land, an environmental permit was required before the work, practice, or implementation of the proposed project began.

ARGUMENTS OF THE PLAINTIFF

• Plaintiffs challenged the Supreme Court's finding that no environmental permit was required for the Dwarka Expressway on the grounds that the expressway already existed and was recently declared a national highway under section 2 (2) of the National Highways Act 1956 accepts legal notice of June 23, 2017.
• In addition, Plaintiffs argued that the High Court allowed NHAI to continue its overpass construction activities despite the fact that it is clear from the record that NHAI never required prior permits or licenses, including current and existing ones. licenses. Deforestation permits and consent orders under the Aviation Act 1981 and the Water Act 1974.
• According to the plaintiffs, the Supreme Court was challenged not only on the requirement for an environmental permit but also on an environmental permit which assessed the full range of illegal and illegal activities carried out by the NHI under the guise of developing projects of "national importance".

CASE PROCEEDINGS

• The Applicants argued that the construction of the aforementioned DDA expressway would inevitably lead to an exponential increase in traffic, increased air pollution, and noise; creating traffic congestion and increasing concerns about road safety for all residents of Dwarka, while significantly reducing forest cover in the surrounding area.
• During the hearing, the Court asked Mr. Prashant Bhushan, who appeared for the petitioners for reasons as to why he had come to the district court at the LPA, and why should the Court consider an application for a special license against a sole judge.
• Mr. Bhushan answered that it was because the matter was so serious and urgent. They photographed that they work day and night.
• He further contended that the Special Licensing Petition was filed against the final ruling of July 30, 2021, approved by the Delhi High Court, rejecting an NHI order documenting all permits/approvals requiring enforcement of residential road construction.

What do you think about the judgement? Share your views in the comments section.