VIVEK RUSIA,J. - (1.)Regard being had to the similitude in the controversy involved in the present cases, with the joint request of the parties, these matters are heard finally and are being decided by this common order.
This is the third round of litigation before this Court regarding the challenge to the widening work. The State Government published a draft Master Plan for Indore City, 1991 in which 80 feet wide link Road was proposed from A.B. Road to Ring Road via and Saket Nagar (in short- "the Road"). The 80 feet wide Road from A.B. Road to the house of Jankilal Bhaiya had already been constructed. Thereafter, Indore Master Plan, 2021 came into force w.e.f. 1/1/2008 in which the width of the road has been reduced to 40 feet Since there was a delay in the construction of the second part of the 80 feet wide Road from the house of Jankilal Bhaiya to Ring Road by Indore Municipal Corporation, a Writ Petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation i.e. W.P. No.698 of 2002 (PIL) came to be filed before this Court. The petitioner being an association of residents of the locality alleged that the Indore Municipal Corporation and Town and Country Planning Department are not constructing 80 feet wide Road in their locality connecting the existing A.B. Road with the Ring Road. It was further alleged that at the instance of the private respondent, the State Government vide orders dtd. 12/7/2002 and 9/3/2020, reduced the width of the said Road from 80 to 40 feet Accordingly, it was prayed that the respondent / State of Madhya Pradesh and Municipal Corporation be directed not to change the alignment and 80 feet width of the Road

(2.)The writ petition was disposed of with an observation that the Road should first be widened up to 40 feet and within a period of six months after the Road is widened, the authority should decide based on traffic during the peak hour as to whether the road should be widened up to 80 feet if necessary by the acquisition of adjacent land and property. It has been further observed that since the map will have to be sanctioned by the Indore Municipal Corporation, it is the Indore Municipal Corporation which will determine as to how exactly 40 feet width of the land will be left from the centre of the Road by the respondents No.4 and 5.
(3.)The relevant paras are reproduced below:-
"15. We have perused the two communications dtd. 8/3/2000 and 20/4/2000 of the Joint Director, Town and Country Planning Department to the Director, Town and Country Planning Department all other communications of the authorities of the Town and Country Planning Department on the subject on which reliance has been placed by the respondents No.1 and 4 and in the said communications though relevant factors have been mentioned while fixing the width of the road 40 feet, the most relevant factor namely the existing traffic and the traffic in future on the said road connecting Anand Bazar area with Ring Road does not find mention. We have held that the traffic requirement of an area including the road or street or means of access would be of paramount relevance while deciding as to what should be the width of the road or street or means of access. But since the existing width of road is less than 40 feet, it will not be possible for the authority now to decide as to whether a road of the width of 40 feet will be able to take care of the moving traffic of the area in question. It is only after the road is widened to 40 feet and the traffic in the area moves on such road of 40 feet width that the authorities will be able to assess as to whether the road requires to be widened up to 80 feet or not. For this reasons we of the considered opinion that as per the impugned decision in Annexure P/4 the road should be first widened up to 40 feet and within a period of six months after the road is so widened authorities should take decision on the basis of the traffic during the peak hours as to whether the road should be widened up to 80 feet if necessary by acquisition of adjacent land and properties. We are also of the considered opinion that till the authorities decide within the aforesaid time or six months as to whether the road requires widening up to 80 feet, the interim order passed by this Court on 6/5/2002 restraining the respondent No.4 from making any construction on front 40 feet from the centre of the road should continue but it will be open for respondent No.4 to make construction by leaving 40 feet land open from the centre of the road in accordance with the sanction of the Indore Municipal Corporation. Similarly we direct that the respondent No.5 also will not make any construction int eh front 40 feet measured from the centre of the road. These restraints on respondents No.4 and 5 are necessary int eh public interest or the general interest of the development of the area because if constructions are made by them in the meanwhile on the front side of their land, it may not be possible for the authorities to expand the road to 80 feet by acquisition and payment of heavy compensation even if the requirement of the traffic in the area may warrant expansion of the road to 80 feet. Since the map will have to be sanctioned by the Indore Municipal Corporation,, it is the Indore Municipal Corporation which will determine as to how exactly this 40 feet width of the land will be left from the centre of the road by respondent No.4 and 5."