The duty of the local authority to abate public nuisance and the expanded concept of locus standi in public interest litigation, allowing any member of the public to maintain an action for redressal of public wrong, nuisance, or injury caused by a public authority.

KS. Radhakrishnan, J.

This Writ Petition has been preferred to abate a public nuisance. Petitioner is a social worker who is concerned with the obstruction caused to a public road by the existence of a land with a building thereon rendering the traffic dangerous to the public.

2. The land and building in question abuts on the Sahodaran Ayyappan Road, hereinafter called 'S.A. Road'„ which is one of the most important roads connecting Cochin City with Vytilla junction. Corporation of Cochin and the Greater Cochin Development Authority finding the extreme necessity of widening the S.A. road, jointly took up a project. Many of the good Samaritans who owns lands on either side of the road voluntarily surrendered lands for widening the road, a benevolent gesture deserves approbation. G.C.D.A. as well as Corporation of Cochin have reciprocated this good gesture by granting exemption to them from the Kerala Building Rules for constructing building in the remaining area. Corporation stated by virtue of this scheme, they could save about 28 crores of rupees apart from the normal expenses to be incurred if proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act are initiated. Major portion of the land from Kadavanthra junction to Manorama junction has already been obtained free of cost and formed except the portion in dispute.

3. We are in this case confronted with a situation where one of the land owners, additional fourth respondent, who is the owner of building Nos. 28/277 and 28/278 within the Corporation of Cochin situated on the southern side of S.A. road expressed difficulty to give free surrender of her property for widening of the road. She is residing in building No. 28/277 and building No. 28/278 is situated abutting on the S.A. road. For widening the road, Corporation insisted for free surrender of approximately 3 cents of land with building No. 28/278 which covers approximately 500 sq. feet. Request for free surrender was not acceptable to additional fourth respondent since she has no intention to construct building in the remaining area and therefore not interested in the order of exemption from Building Rules. Additional fourth respondent is a widow who resides in building No. 28/277 just behind building No. 28/278. She lives with the pension of her late husband and not capable of taking up any

construction.

4. Corporation as well as the G.C.D.A. anticipating that all land owners on either. side of the S.A. road would surrender their lands free, started widening the road between Vyttila junction and Manorama junction. Additional fourth respondent's building is situated in between Kadavanthra junction and Manorama junction, a solitary building which abuts on S.A. road in that area. Heavy vehicles including buses, trucks, two wheelers, cyclists etc. find it difficult to pass through the road. On reaching the building in question, they have to take a sudden'U' turn causing danger to the pedestrians, cyclists, two wheelers, cars etc.

5. The additional fourth respondent has submitted a plan before this Court which shows the lie of the property. The plan shows that if the road is widened, the approximate total width of the road in that area would be 22.40 metres. Corporation has constructed a median in the middle of the road for separation. The land and building owned by the additional fourth respondent abuts on the S.A. road by about 10.75 metres. The width of the road in that area is only 11.65 metres and in the balance portion, the width is approximately 22.40 metres. Pencil marked portion in the plan would show how the vehicles have to ply through the road causing danger to the pedestrians, travelling public etc. The land and the building thereon is really a public nuisance.

6. Petitioner, in the above-mentioned circumstances, has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to take immediate steps to abate the nuisance by acquiring the land with building No. 28/278 (described as XVIII/254 in the Writ Petition) in