Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 27066
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Vibhu Bakhru, CJ, K.S. Hemalekha, J
Anand Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
WP No. 12870 of 2026
The court will not interfere with major infrastructure projects under Public Interest Litigation merely based on speculative concerns regarding design efficiency or potential bottlenecks, especially when construction is already ongoing and a clear public necessity exists.
Headnote:The present petition, filed under Art. 226 and Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, serves as a Public Interest Litigation challenging an infrastructure project concerning an elevated corridor. The petitioners contend that the project is 'arbitrary, unscientific, [and] non-transparent' and seek the constitution of an expert committee to review the project's feasibility and environmental impact. The petitioners specifically allege a design anomaly where a wider elevated corridor connects to a narrow existing railway overhead bridge, suggesting it creates a bottleneck. The core issue before the court was whether to interfere with ongoing public infrastructure work based on claims of design inefficiency and lack of transparency. The Court observed that the project is already under construction and emphasized that there is an existing, recognized necessity for wider roads to address congestion. Furthermore, the Court noted there is no valid reason to assume the authorities would not address technical bottlenecks to ensure the project's overall effectiveness. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the public interest challenge regarding infrastructure. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner arguments regarding alleged design flaws and bottlenecking. (Para 2) |
| 3. court refuses to intervene in ongoing governmental infrastructure projects. (Para 3) |
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition as a public interest litigation, inter alia, impugning the decision of the respondents to implement the elevated corridor package to Malur town as being 'arbitrary, unscientific, non-transparent' and contrary to constitutional principles. The petitioners also prays that an independent expert committee be constituted to examine the feasibility, necessity and environmental consequences of the said project and to find the least intrusive alternative to the project insofar as it affects Malur town.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn our attention to photographs of the construction being raised as well as the route map of the road, which indicates that construction has commenced. He submits that there is an apparent anomaly as the elevated corridor connects a railway overhead bridge [ROB], which is only 36 feet wide. But the width of the elevated corridor is 100 feet. Resultantly, there would be a congestion on the bridge as the elevated corridor before and after the bridge would be significantly wider. He submits that there is no permission to widen the width of the ROB and therefore no purpose would be served by the construction of the elevated corridor as the bridge would serve as a bottleneck.
3. We are not persuaded to entertain the present petition. The project is already under construction. Undeniably there is a requirement for providing wider roads to alleviate the problem of congestion. Insofar as the ROB serving as bottleneck is concerned, there is no reason to believe that the respondents would not remove the bottleneck for the effective benefit of the elevated corridor. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
