The court affirmed that administrative decisions regarding bridge construction must respect expert evaluations and procedural fairness, and should not be overturned absent clear irrationality or bias.

JUDGMENT :

R.K. PATTANAIK, J.

1. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioners assailing the impugned decision of opposite party No.2 as at Annexure-7 by order dated 8^th August, 2024 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and for a direction to the opposite parties to construct the HL bridge at Jharabereni in place of the approved site at Tileiposi on the grounds inter alia that the same is necessary in the interest of justice.

2. The petitioners as the residents of village-Jharabereni under Budhapal G.P. have questioned of arbitrary shifting of the site vis-à-vis the construction of HL bridge over Tikira river which is a project under the Panchayatiraj & Rural Development Department, Government of Odisha primarily on the ground that they are not benefited by the decision of the Government. Bereft of unnecessary details, the brief facts of the case are that in the year 2020-21, opposite party No.1 proposed construction of HL bridges at different rural area of the State including the site at serial No.1 of the proposal at village-Jharabereni. According to the petitioners, after the proposal of the Government in the year 2020-21 as per Annexure-1, opposite party No.3 visited the spot on 18^th March, 2023 for inspection/site verification and also for the soil test located at Tileiposi site, but it was found unfit for the reasons, such as, (a) right angle crossing is not available; (b) it involves large scale of private lands in the left approach; (c) the left approach has to pass parallel to the river bank for some distance after which sharp bend is required, which is not desirable; (d) in the right approach, a private mango orchard and private land exists and inside village-Tileiposi, the existing road has become too narrow having dwelling houses on both sides; and (e) uncertainty in completion of the bridge at the site.

3. Referring to a copy of the inspection report as at Annexure-2 series, according to the petitioners, the proposed site was found unfit for construction of HL bridge, whereafter, Jharabereni Pradhan Sahi Ghat situate around the same vicinity was identified, pursuant to which, the opposite parties made a visit to the spot for site inspection and prepared an enquiry report dated 29^th August, 2023 with a conclusion that the same is fit for construction of the bridge. A copy of the enquiry report is at Annexure-3 referring to which the above claim has been advanced by the petitioners. It is pleaded on record that the opposite parties allowed to construction work of HL bridge to the contractor at Tileiposi site over Tikira river which was earlier rejected for the reason that it was unfit by an allotment order in his favour vide Annexure-4. The petitioners being aggrieved by the work order issued to the contractor challenged the decision of the opposite parties on the following grounds, namely,(i) the shifting of the site could not have been directed especially when the site inspection report as per Annexure-2 series recommended such construction to be unsuitable which was followed by the representation dated 12^th February, 2024 submitted to opposite party No.2;(ii) the opposite parties arbitrarily proposed such shifting of the site claiming that there has been inspection of the site at Tileiposi in presence of the concerned officials and upon recommendation received, the construction of the bridge has been considered suitable, inasmuch as, the decision dated 17^th February, 2024 is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India; (iii) opposite party No.2 did not follow the direction of the Court in W.P.(C) No.4632 of 2024 and instead of complying the same with a Committee