Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 8232
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.I. Arun, J
MRS HEMALATHA JOSHI – Appellant
Versus
GREATER BANGALORE AUTHORITY – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.6836 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: L.M. Chidanandayya
For the Respondents: Pawan Kumar, P.D. Surana, Bopanna Belliappa
Courts generally defer to the administrative wisdom of authorities regarding the placement of public infrastructure, provided such placement does not unduly obstruct essential services like emergency hospital access.
Headnote:The petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the shifting of a bus stop to a location in front of a hospital. The petitioners contended that the relocation is unscientific, would increase congestion on Bellary road, and hamper the ingress and egress of ambulances. The respondents argued that the shift was based on a detailed study by traffic police to ease congestion. The court examined whether it should interfere with the administrative decision regarding the location of the bus stop. It was reasoned that since the bus stop is located on property owned by the Greater Bengaluru Authority, the decision is best left to the wisdom of the concerned authorities, and the court should not substitute its own wisdom for that of the authorities. The writ petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents concerned to consider the request of the petitioners and to structure the new intended bus stop in such a manner that it will not unduly hamper the ingress and egress of patients and ambulances from the petitioners' hospital.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the relocation of public transport infrastructure based on potential obstruction of emergency services and traffic congestion. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. judicial deference to administrative expertise in urban planning and traffic management. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. requirement for administrative authorities to balance public utility placement with the protection of essential emergency access. (Para 6 , 7) |
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMMUNICATION ANNEXURE-A DATED 30.01.2026 BEARING NO.BM.MASA.SANSTHE:3235/2025-26 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT; ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are aggrieved by shifting of a bus stop which is situated in front of HMT Bhavan, Bellary road to the premises in front of its hospital.
2. The case of the petitioners is that such a shifting is unscientific and it can only lead to further congestion on the busy Bellary road instead of easing the congestion. It is further submitted that the plan will also hamper the easy ingress and egress of ambulance from the petitioners' hospital. On the said ground, it is prayed that the writ petition be allowed and the respondents be restrained from shifting the bus stop.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents justify the shifting of the bus stop and it is submitted that the said action is taken upon a detailed study by the traffic police and on their recommendation, to ease the congestion on the busy Bellary road.
4. Admittedly, the bus stop is being shifted to a property which is owned by the Greater Bengaluru Authority and not on the petitioners' property. Where a bus stop has to be located, is best left to the wisdom of the concerned authority and in this case, the traffic police and the BBMP. The Court should not usually substitute wisdom of the authorities concerned by its wisdom.
5. However, it is also necessary for the authorities concerned to cater to the interests of the petitioners. Admittedly, the petitioner is a hospital and the bus stop should be structured in such a manner that the ingress and egress of patients and ambulances from the petitioners' property should not be hampered.
6. Hence, the writ petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondents concerned to consider the request of the petitioners and to structure the new intended bus stop in such a manner that it will not unduly hamper the ingress and egress of patients and ambulances from the petitioners' hospital.
7. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
