PUNE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. PRAKASH HARKACHAND PARAKH
LAWS(SC)-2021-3-32
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 10,2021

Pune Metropolitan Regional Development Authority Appellant
VERSUS
Prakash Harkachand Parakh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

AJAY RASTOGI,J. - (1.) Delay condoned. Civil Appeal @ SLP(Civil) Diary No. 1282/2020
(2.) Leave granted.
(3.) The appellant is primarily aggrieved by an interim order passed by the High Court dated 4th October, 2019 in a writ petition filed at the instance of the 1st respondent pursuant to which the street opened for public use has been restricted on certain terms and conditions which has been referred to in the operative para 17 of the order impugned which is as under:- "17. However, a balance can always be struck. We, therefore, grant an interim order not in absolute terms as claimed by the petitioner, but as under: (a) There will be an interim order in terms of prayer clause (d) but the communication/order dated 18th January, 2019 will be in abeyance on the condition that the petitioner do not make any construction and keep the portion which is used as private road open to sky. They would also not make any construction immediately adjacent to or abutting the same; (b) This private road will be used by the petitioner together with the societies or the buildings' occupiers along with members of public but only before 8.30 pm in the night and after 5.30 am in the morning. Between those hours, the road will be closed to the public; (c) This private road can be enclosed on both sides by putting up iron gates or boom barriers and placing security personnel; (d) The petitioner will display a notice board on both sides to this effect and allow the members of public to use this road though styled as internal road from 5.30 am in the morning until 8.30 pm in the night; (e) This arrangement will be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both sides; (f) This will not confer any rights in either parties presently; (g) The usage will not also make the 1st respondent together with the 2nd respondent the absolute owner of the property; (h) In the event any wall has been demolished, so as to protect this road from indiscriminate and uncontrolled so also unrestricted use by the public, then the 1st respondent shall allow the petitioner to reconstruct the wall to the extent it was earlier, but this wall will have the gates or barriers as directed by us. (i) As an added safety precaution, this road will not be used by Heavy vehicles or buses and will be used only by LMVs, two-wheelers and auto-rickshaws. To ensure this, a height barrier may be installed by the petitioner. The costs of the gates/barriers will be borne by the petitioner/societies. (j) There will be no public parking on this road and all parking will be for residents only. (k) This order will operate as an interim arrangement during the pendency of this writ petition.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.