Back
Allahabad HC: supersedes
In a firm reaffirmation of the principle that collective welfare takes precedence over , the has refused to stall the construction of the ambitious 24 Kosi Parikrama Marg. The bench, comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Arun Kumar, dismissed a petition seeking to halt the project to safeguard land intended for a private cold storage facility in the Sambhal district.
The Conflict: Faith vs. Finance The petitioners, , had approached the court to prohibit the state authorities from utilizing parts of their land in Village- Farakhpur and Village- Firozpur for the construction of the Parikrama Marg.
The petitioners argued that the project, a crucial religious route intended to serve the Kalki Dham Teerth, would forcibly consume their land. They contended that they were planning to raise a significant loan to construct a cold storage on this site, and that any encroachment by the state road project would cause them irreparable financial embarrassment and prejudice.
State’s Stand and Court’s Wisdom The defended the project, framing it as a vital endeavor under the charitable schemes designed to provide convenient transit for countless devotees.
Following the proceedings, the High Court bench delivered a clear verdict: the petitioner’s private interests could not override the state's broader mandate. Relying on settled , the court observed that .
Key Observations The judgment encapsulated the legal standing of with the following remarks:
-
"The Parikrama Marg is an important public project done in accordance with the policy of the Government and it is well settled that individual interest must yield to larger carried in Government policies that subserve such interest."
-
"We cannot, therefore, restrain the construction of the Parikrama Marg."
-
"It is then for the petitioner to decide whether he would still wish to construct any Cold Storage etc. in the truncated part of the land."
A Pathway for Clarity While the court declined to halt the machinery of construction, it provided a pragmatic solution for the affected landholders. The bench directed the petitioners to approach the to have their land officially demarcated. This ensures the petitioners can identify exactly which portions of their land remain unaffected by the road project, allowing them to make informed decisions regarding their proposed business venture on the remaining plot.
The court further clarified that while construction on the remaining land is permitted, it must occur in accordance with regulations regarding distance from the newly established Parikrama Marg.
Implications for Future Infrastructure This ruling serves as a reminder to developers and landowners alike that large-scale infrastructure projects—particularly those with deep socio-religious significance—enjoy a high threshold of protection in the eyes of the law. By prioritizing public policy, the has signaled that while the rights of the individual are respected, they do not serve as an absolute roadblock to developments vital to community infrastructure.
The Registrar (Compliance) has been directed to communicate the order to the District Magistrate and the Executive Engineer of the to ensure a transparent process.
