DEVI PRASAD SINGH, J. - (1.) The petitioner, who is the wife of a Lieutenant Colonel of the Indian Army residing in Jankipuram locality of the capital of the State, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India feeling aggrieved of the encroachment of roads and traffic mismanagement in the cities of the State of U.P. including Lucknow.
(2.) THE submission is that on account of inaction on the part of the State during peak hours, congestion takes place in the markets as well as densely -populated areas of the city of Lucknow. The attention of this Court has been drawn to other cities of the State of U.P., particularly the 'A' Class cities with the submission that the State has failed to discharge its constitutional and statutory obligations to provide quality of life i.e. fundamental in nature, protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It has been argued by the petitioner's counsel that on account of increase of population in the urban area, it is expected from the State that the appropriate steps should be taken to manage the smooth movement of the vehicles in the cities. Parking slots or lots and taxi stands should be provided and be marked by notice boards conspicuously at appropriate places to check the traffic congestions. The State Government has not taken any step to make it mandatory for the builders and colonizers to provide parking lot in basements or at ground floor while proceeding ahead with the construction of multi -storeyed buildings, malls, shopping complexes or colonies. Plans are sanctioned and maps are passed by the local bodies and developmental authorities without attention to the growing problem of traffic congestion in the cities.
(3.) IT was argued that it is of common knowledge and experience of every citizen of the State that there is mismanaged traffic system in the cities like Lucknow, Allahabad, Varanasi, Gorakhpur, Bareilly, Kanpur, Meerut, Agra, Ghaziabad etc. Even in small cities too, no preventive steps have been taken to channelise the traffic movement. The submission of the petitioner's counsel is that the parking slots should be notified and on road -side, places should be earmarked where taxies, buses etc. may be stopped to facilitate the boarding of passengers. It has been submitted that at nowhere in the city of Lucknow, notice boards have been installed earmarking the parking places for vehicles like tempo, taxies or bus stands. The position is the same with other cities of the State of U.P. It has also been submitted that in densely populated markets, shopkeepers had raised projections towards road -side and encroachment has been done covering not only the drainage system but over the roads also. Even outside cities, roads have been encroached by the private persons in contravention of the provisions contained in U.P. Roadside Land Control Act, 1945.;