JUDGMENT

These Writ Petitions are filed with almost same prayers. The prayer in WP(C) No.12126 of 2021 is extracted hereunder:

“i. Issue appropriate direction commanding the respondents to construct the weigh-bridge near the Panniyankara Toll Booth in the original site identified and demarcated by the NH Authorities and not to shift the same to the frontage of petitioners building situated in Sy.No.439/33, 439/21, 439/34 of Vadakkencheri 1 Village, Alathur Taluk, Palakkad.

ii. Issue appropriate writ or order prohibiting the respondent from constructing a weighbridge just in front of petitioners' property situated in Sy.No.439/33, 439/21, 439/34 of Vadakkencheri 1 Village, Alathur Taluk, Palakkad.

iii. Declare that the National Highway Authority can set up a Weigh Bridge near a Toll Booth only in an open area with sufficient parking and waiting space and also ensuring that no hindrance or obstruction to the peaceful enjoyment and entry to any private establishment is caused.

iv. Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case”.

2. The petitioner in WP(C) No.12126 of 2021 is conducting an SSI Unit by the name and style 'Perfect Industries' engaged in the manufacturing of fabricated metal products at building no.19/610 in Vadakkencheri Village, Alathur Taluk, Palakkad.

3. The 1st petitioner's husband in WP(C)

No.12128 of 2021 was conducting a Bakery in his building situated in Survey No.439/23 of Peechi Village, Alathur Taluk, on the side of the National Highway. His land and building was acquired by the National Highway Authority of India for widening of National Highway as four lane. Utilizing the compensation amount and also by selling her gold ornaments, it is stated that the 1st petitioner purchased 5 cents of property facing the National Highway in Vadakkencheri Village, Alathur Taluk. It is stated that a commercial building is constructed in that premises. The 1st petitioner leased out the ground floor of the building to the 2nd petitioner for conducting a Hotel.

4. The grievance of the petitioners is that the National Highway Authority of India is going to construct a weigh-bridge and the proposed construction is in front of the petitioners' building and hence the ingress and egress to their property is obstructed. The specific case of the petitioners is that the proposal originally was to construct the weigh-bridge near the toll plaza which is 160 meters away from the petitioners' property. The apprehension of the petitioners is that now the proposal is shifted. It is submitted in this Writ Petition that the proposal is now to construct the weigh-bridge in front of the petitioners' property in these two Writ Petitions. Therefore, these Writ Petitions are filed.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the National Highway Authority of India.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioners reiterated her contention in the Writ Petitions and submitted that there was originally a proposal to construct the weigh-bridge far away from the petitioners' property and now there is a proposal for shifting the same near to the property of the petitioners and that will create lot of problems to the petitioners, especially the ingress and egress to the property of the petitioners from the National Highway.

7. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that apprehension of the petitioners is without any basis. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that there is only one proposal to construct weigh-bridge and it is not in front of the petitioners' property. It is far away from the petitioners' property. The learned Standing Counsel takes me through the counter affidavit filed by the National Highway Authority of India in which it is stated that the weigh-bridge is about 45 meters away from the property of the petitioner in WP(C) No.12126 of 2021 and the weigh-bridge is about 20 meters away from the property involved in WP(C) No.12128 of 2021. Learned counsel submitt