Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 19119
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J
NEETA W/O. SANTOSH SHIRGAONKAR – Appellant
Versus
COL. SHANKAR PRASHAR – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 107847 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. RAVIRAJ C. PATIL, SRI. SHRIPRASAD J. JOSHI, SMT. VIDYASHREE I. SULDHAL
For the Respondents: SRI. ARAVIND KAMATH, SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, SRI. K.S. PATIL, A.S. SOMANNAVAR, SRI. JAGADISH PATIL
Restrictions on public access to military-controlled roads classified as Class A-1 are permissible under Articles 19(1)(b) and (d) of the Constitution when justified for security and operational needs.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 19(1)(b) and 19(1)(d) - Writ Petition for Mandamus - Petitioners sought to open a locked public road and prevent restrictions on movement by Military authorities - Court addressed the legal status of the road and its classification as Class A-1 land under the Cantonment Land Administration Rules, which restricts public access. (Paras 1, 2, 4, 10, 16, 20)
(B) The closure of the road was not deemed unreasonable as it was necessary for the safety of military personnel and their families residing in adjacent quarters. Court reaffirmed that restrictions can be justifiable if they serve a legitimate purpose. (Paras 16, 18, 20)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, residents of Sainik Nagar, claimed the right to use a road that had been locked by Military Authorities, impacting their access to essential services. Petitioners argued the road was historically used by the public for decades and did not belong to the military. (Paras 2, 3)
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the classification of the land as Class A-1, indicating it is reserved for military use, thus affirming the authority of the Military to restrict access to the road during certain hours. (Paras 10, 11, 20)
Issues: The primary issue was whether the military authorities had the right to close the road and if such restrictions violated the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Articles 19(1)(b) and (d) of the Constitution. (Paras 4.7, 6, 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Military Authorities have the jurisdiction to restrict access to their property, especially given the classification as Class A-1 land, and that temporary restrictions for operational or security reasons are permissible under constitutional provisions. (Paras 16, 20)
Result: Writ petition dismissed; the petitioners permitted to use the road only from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim to reopen a public road. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioners argue for fundamental rights. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. discussion on land classification. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court affirms jurisdiction over road restrictions. (Para 10 , 12 , 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed, usage of road regulated. (Para 20) |
ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
a. To issue a Writ of Mandamus and direct the Respondent No.1 and other concerned Respondents to open the lock put by the Respondent No. 01 on the public road at Laxmi tek forthwit.
b. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other Writ and direct the Respondents not to restrict movement of the petitioners or any other citizen/resident on the public road on which the Respondent No.1 has now restricted the movement.
c. To grant such other and further reliefs/s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of this petition, in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The petitioners claim to be the residents of Sainik Nagar, Laxmitek, Belagavi, adjacent to the residential quarters of Maratha Light Infantry Regimental Centre (M.L.I.R.C.) Belagavi. They claim to be since decades utilizing the road that connects the road through the residential quarters to many roads of the city which comes under the C.D.P. of the Belagavi City Corporation and that it is the only road which has the direct approach towards the city, Schools, Hospitals etc. The other roads add an additional 4-5 kms to reach the said destination from the residence of the petitioners. Furthermore, those roads are not accessible to four wheelers or big vehicles.
3. A compound wall separated the residential area of the petitioners with the residential quarters of M.L.I.R.C. Though there were gates in existence, the said gates had been kept open for the petitioners and anybody else to access the road. All of a sudden on 14.11.2023, respondent No.1 is alleged to have closed the gates and locked them blocking the access to the main roads and CDP roads. The residents like the petitioners who were making use of the said roads are now prevented from using the said road, which was being used to go to their schools. It is aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.
4. Sri. Shriprasad J. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that;
4.1. Respondent No.1 has no authority to close the said road, which has been used for decades. His action is arbitrary and a misuse of the powers and authority vested with him, impinging the fundamental rights of the petitioners enshrined in Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India , which restricts public movements on the roads possessed by the Cantonment Board. He contends that the said road is neither owned nor it has been constructed by the army, but it is the Belagavi City Corporation.
4.2. He submits that the road being in use by the general public for last 80-100 years, the respondents have no authority or right to close the public road and curtail the fundamental rights of the petitioners.
4.3. The land in question is not the one which is classified as Class ‘A’ land nor is it reserved for any specific military purposes. It being only a road, the general public are required to be allowed to use the said road.
4.4. In this regard he relies upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr.Nitin G. Khot and Others Vs. Station Commandant, Belgaum , ILR 1998 KAR 2194 , more particularly paragraphs 2,6,7,10, 12 and 15, which are reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
2. Such a golden right enshrined in Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution was alleged to have been violated by the respondent Army Authorities in the City of Belgaum, a peaceful and historic city located in the North-West of Karnataka. It is alleged that the Army Authorities have completely closed 16 roads in the city resulting in not only the inconvenience to the residents of the city but also
