Underground parking lot plan rejected
The High Court, acting on a writ petition filed by R. Chandran, had held that the proposal to construct a multilevel underground car parking lot included a commercial venture, which was impermissible on a site that had been reserved for recreational purpose.
A Bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly dismissed the appeal at the admission stage against this order.
When senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Corporation, submitted that the underground parking was meant to ease congestion in that area, Justice Ganguly said: “If you construct the parking lot, the 60-year-old park will be lost forever.” Counsel said the Corporation had given an undertaking to preserve the park. Justice Ganguly said: “We know the sanctity of the undertaking given by the Corporation. You find some other place for the parking lot.”
Justice Singhvi asked counsel: “How many illegal constructions have been regularised in that area? The government has been repeatedly regularising illegal constructions. You have permitted builders to construct illegally. Is the parking lot for such builders? We know it is the function of the Executive to construct a parking lot, but the court cannot keep its eyes shut when you allow illegal constructions, which has become a hell for the community.”
When Mr. Rohatgi pointed out the underground Palika Bazaar in Connaught Place in the capital, Justice Singhvi said “It is suffocating there. You can't breathe.”
In its appeal, the Chennai Corporation said there had been a tremendous growth in vehicle population in the city in the last 12 years. T. Nagar was the busiest and largest commercial centre in the city. Owing to insufficient vehicular parking space in T. Nagar, visitors to shops parked their two-wheelers and four-wheelers on the roadside causing traffic congestion. Hence the proposal to provide an underground car parking without disturbing the playground.
No comments:
Post a Comment