The judgment establishes the principle that public roads are meant for passage only and should be kept free from encroachment, emphasizing the importance of spatial planning and wider flanks for pedestrian safety.

1. This is a public interest litigation in which the petitioners complain that on a public road, plot no. 534 situate in mauza Dakhingaon, P.S. Wazirganj, District Gaya the respondents are constructing a lavoratory on the flanks of the public road.

2. That a Iavoratory is being constructed at the site indicated is not in issue. The position of the Iavoratory has been shown by the petitioners in a map, which is appended at annexure 5 to the rejoinder affidavit in reply to the counter affidavit of the respondents. The map has been certified by the Amin of the village Kurkihar, P.S. Wazirganj, District Gaya. The position of the Iavoratory is indicated on the road itself. Ext. D/1 also annexed with the counter affidavit of the respondents is also a map showing location of the Iavoratory on the same plot i.e. plot no. 534. The position is no different than indicated by the petitioners. Thus, on a statement of fact there is no issue. Besides, the petitioners have shown photographs to the court indicating visually where exactly the Iavoratory is. These photographs were shown to the learned Government Advocate, Mr. S. D. Yadav. Clearly, this Iavoratory is on plot no. 534. It is on the flanks of the road and it is on the road.

3. Public roads are to be protected. Public roads are not to be congested. Public roads are meant for the purpose of passage only and no other. In this regard the court reminds the State-respondents of the decision of the Supreme Court: The Municipal Board, Manglaur V/s. Mahadeoji Maharaj. An issue was taken upto the Supreme Court whether three structures could be placed on the flanks of the public road. These structures were a piayo, library and a statue of Mahatma Gandhi.The Supreme Court negatived the position that nothing will come on the road as it is meant for passage only.

4. Besides, after the amendment to he Constitution by the 73rd and 74th Amendment one mandate of the Constitution is very significant. In Article 243ZD of he Constitution of India in matters relating to planning whether within Panchayats or Municipalities, there is an obligation to plan with a concept of spatial planning. Constriction is the antithesis of space. In an urban habitat anything constructed will be planned. In public places it will be a public plan. Buildings and structures have to be spread out under the concept of spatiai planning as opposed to congestion. The roads of the nation have to take care of the traffic of the future, increasing population and faster traffic. The flanks of the main, which are part of it will need to be wider for the safety of the pedestrians. Thus, public roads are to be kept free from encroachment.

5. Mandamus is issued to the respondents to remove the construction of the lavoratory on plot no. 534 on the flanks of public road. Hereinafter, where ever a public convenience, like public lavoratory is constructed, the respondents will pay heed to the law and keep it off the road and its flanks and keep in mind the concept of planning as a spatial planning referred to in the Constitution.

6. The petition succeeds.

7. Allowed with costs.