No construction of Pune's Balbharati-Paud Phata Road till Supreme Court's decision on inspection report: Apex Court panel to state
1
2
3
4
5
6
Pune: The Supreme Court-constituted
Central Empowered Committee
in a letter on Friday requested the Maharashtra chief secretary to ensure that no construction is carried out in "
deemed forest
" area as its report on the proposed
Balbharati-Paud Phata Road
is pending consideration before the apex court.
"The matter is under consideration by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court
. It is requested that no construction work is carried out in 'deemed forest' in violation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the T N Godavarman vs Union of India & Ors. Case (1996) and subsequent orders, and Rule 16 (1) of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023," stated the letter by CEC chairman Siddhanta Das.
The letter came in response to a representation by Sumita Kale and others from the Vetal Tekdi Bachav Kruti Samiti (VTBKS) that sought the committee's intervention to prevent "serious environmental destruction of the forest and hill slope on Vetal hill" for the construction of the (2.1km) Balbharati-Paud Phata Road by
Pune Municipal Corporation
(PMC).
As a planning authority, PMC has proposed the Balbharati-Paud Phata Road with an objective to decongest the traffic from Balbharati to German Bakery Law College, Aathle Chowk and Paud Phata. Environmental activists have been opposing the plan for years now on the grounds that the proposed road would be no solution to resolving the traffic congestion but would only cause huge environmental harm to the hill.
On March 2, 2024, Kale and others had approached the Supreme Court-constituted Central Empowered Committee with a plea to stop construction of the proposed road.
The committee then deputed its member, Sunil Limaye, to assess the situation on ground and get first-hand information and views about the Balbharti-Paud Phata Road from all stakeholders.
A joint meeting of the applicants, project proponent (PMC) and the forest department was held on April 5, 2024, and followed by two site inspections on April 12, 2024, and April 15, 2024. Based on a detailed note by Limaye about the assessment exercise, the Central Empowered Committee member secretary, Banumathi G, placed a report on Sept 19, 2024, before the Supreme Court and the same is pending final decision by the court.
TOI on Friday made calls and sent a message to state chief secretary Sujata Saunik seeking her response on the matter. However, there was no response till the time of going to press.
Aniruddha Pawaskar, head of the PMC's road department, told TOI: "We are waiting for an official copy of the Central Empowered Committee letter and our administration will take a call on future course of action after due legal consultation.
We will follow the Supreme Court's directives in the matter."
The Central Empowered Committee report to the Supreme Court has elaborated in details various aspects of the issue and concluded, among other things, that constructing the Balbharati-Paud Phata Road Road "will not be a permanent solution to the present problem" and that construction of the proposed road shall not be permitted to save the forest and biodiversity of the area.
It stated: "It is a principle proven multiple times world over that more roads do not give permanent solutions to traffic problems.
In fact, they lead to more vehicles on the roads which again results in larger traffic congestion."
The report has suggested a slew of alternatives and the need to provide an efficient and adequate public transport system, requisite traffic management and good last mile connectivity with mass transit systems.
VTBKS member Prajakta Divekar said: "We hope the state govt actively protects Vetal Tekdi as the natural heritage of Pune in the wake of the Central Empowered Committee report."
Pune: The Supreme Court-constituted Central Empowered Committee in a letter on Friday requested the Maharashtra chief secretary to ensure that no construction is carried out in "deemed forest" area as its report on the proposed Balbharati-Paud Phata Road is pending consideration before the apex court.
"The matter is under consideration by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is requested that no construction work is carried out in 'deemed forest' in violation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the T N Godavarman vs Union of India & Ors. Case (1996) and subsequent orders, and Rule 16 (1) of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023," stated the letter by CEC chairman Siddhanta Das.
The letter came in response to a representation by Sumita Kale and others from the Vetal Tekdi Bachav Kruti Samiti (VTBKS) that sought the committee's intervention to prevent "serious environmental destruction of the forest and hill slope on Vetal hill" for the construction of the (2.1km) Balbharati-Paud Phata Road by Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC).
As a planning authority, PMC has proposed the Balbharati-Paud Phata Road with an objective to decongest the traffic from Balbharati to German Bakery Law College, Aathle Chowk and Paud Phata. Environmental activists have been opposing the plan for years now on the grounds that the proposed road would be no solution to resolving the traffic congestion but would only cause huge environmental harm to the hill.
On March 2, 2024, Kale and others had approached the Supreme Court-constituted Central Empowered Committee with a plea to stop construction of the proposed road.
The committee then deputed its member, Sunil Limaye, to assess the situation on ground and get first-hand information and views about the Balbharti-Paud Phata Road from all stakeholders.
A joint meeting of the applicants, project proponent (PMC) and the forest department was held on April 5, 2024, and followed by two site inspections on April 12, 2024, and April 15, 2024. Based on a detailed note by Limaye about the assessment exercise, the Central Empowered Committee member secretary, Banumathi G, placed a report on Sept 19, 2024, before the Supreme Court and the same is pending final decision by the court.
TOI on Friday made calls and sent a message to state chief secretary Sujata Saunik seeking her response on the matter. However, there was no response till the time of going to press.
Aniruddha Pawaskar, head of the PMC's road department, told TOI: "We are waiting for an official copy of the Central Empowered Committee letter and our administration will take a call on future course of action after due legal consultation.
We will follow the Supreme Court's directives in the matter."
The Central Empowered Committee report to the Supreme Court has elaborated in details various aspects of the issue and concluded, among other things, that constructing the Balbharati-Paud Phata Road Road "will not be a permanent solution to the present problem" and that construction of the proposed road shall not be permitted to save the forest and biodiversity of the area.
It stated: "It is a principle proven multiple times world over that more roads do not give permanent solutions to traffic problems.
In fact, they lead to more vehicles on the roads which again results in larger traffic congestion."
The report has suggested a slew of alternatives and the need to provide an efficient and adequate public transport system, requisite traffic management and good last mile connectivity with mass transit systems.
VTBKS member Prajakta Divekar said: "We hope the state govt actively protects Vetal Tekdi as the natural heritage of Pune in the wake of the Central Empowered Committee report."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
16 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Himanta says drive to identify foreigners to be 'accelerated'; AAMSU protests 'harassment'
Guwahati, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday asserted that the process of identifying illegal foreigners, which was "paused" due to NRC-related matters, will be accelerated, even as protests were witnessed in different parts of the state during Eid prayers on Saturday over "pushback" and "harassment" of minorities in the name of detecting illegal immigrants. Sarma maintained that the state government was looking into the details of an old law, which allows it to "push back" the declared infiltrators without having to mandatorily approach the judiciary. Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a programme in Nalbari, Sarma said that a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, had said that there is no legal requirement for the Assam government to always approach the judiciary in order to identify foreigners. "There exists an immigrants expel order, which is an old law. The Supreme Court has said that this law is in force and a deputy commissioner can give permission for immediate pushback under it," he maintained. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us and we too didn't know about it. The entire matter has come to light in the last few days. We will now discuss it further," he added. The chief minister said pushing back illegal migrants will continue, adding that the process of identifying foreigners, which had been paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be accelerated. "And when the identification of a foreigner happens, there will be no need to send the case to any tribunal. We will directly push them back. We have been preparing for it," he added. Sarma said the process of pushback will continue, though no person with a case pending before the court will be sent back. Meanwhile, members and supporters of the All Assam Minority Students' Union wore black badges and displayed placards against the purported recent pushback of Bangladeshis in the state. They carried out the protest in different parts, including Chirang and Jogighopa, after Eid namaz. AAMSU president Rejaul Karim Sarkar maintained that more intensified protests will be carried out if the government does not stop "harassment" of genuine citizens. "We have seen cases where the entire family is Indian but one member is taken away as an illegal foreigner. Such acts are against humanity. The government should stop harassment of genuine citizens, else we will carry out more agitations in a democratic manner," he said.
Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Despite its flaws, the Collegium system preserves judicial independence,' says SC judge Justice Surya Kant
Strongly defending the collegium system of judicial appointments, Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant said on Saturday that, 'despite its imperfections, it serves as a crucial institutional safeguard … preserving the Judiciary's autonomy.' Speaking at Seattle University on the topic 'The Quiet Sentinel: Courts, Democracy, and the Dialogue Across Borders,' Justice Kant noted that the collegium 'significantly limits interference by the Executive and Legislature, thereby preserving the Judiciary's autonomy and insulating judges from extraneous pressures that could otherwise compromise their impartiality.' He acknowledged that the system 'has been subject to sustained criticism—particularly regarding the opacity of its deliberative processes and the lack of publicly articulated criteria—but recent efforts by the Supreme Court signal a growing commitment to enhancing transparency and public confidence in it.' Referring to proactive judicial interventions that advance constitutional compassion, he asked in his June 4 address, 'How far can courts go in shaping policy?' and 'Is judicial creativity a virtue or a vice?' 'The answer, I believe, lies in intent and integrity. When courts act to empower the powerless, grounded in constitutional text and moral clarity, they do not usurp democracy—they deepen it,' he said. Justice Kant conceded that the judiciary 'has not remained impervious to criticism that at times it breaches the fine line between judicial activism and judicial overreach' and added that 'in recent years, there has been a discernible shift toward greater institutional self-restraint in select domains. The Court has increasingly sought to nudge rather than command, and to engage with other branches of government in efforts to increase dialogic remedies. This evolving balance reflects an awareness that judicial authority is most enduring when it is exercised with a sense of humility—when the Court is seen not as an omnipotent arbiter but as a co-traveller in the democratic journey, grounded in constitutional values.' He described the judiciary as 'the sentinel of constitutional morality' and said it 'has been instrumental in shaping this very democracy's moral spine.' Recalling past challenges, Justice Kant observed that 'the Indian judiciary, too, traversed periods of profound trial and transformation. Particularly during the Emergency, the Court grappled with serious challenges to its independence and, at times, exhibited troubling deference to executive power. Yet, this phase of institutional strain gave way to a renewed judicial consciousness.' He added that 'the judiciary's evolving relationship with its own independence lies at the very heart of how India's vast, pluralistic democracy continues to function with remarkable cohesion. It is not merely the existence of judicial independence that is noteworthy, but rather the degree and contours of that independence—how it is asserted, negotiated, and exercised—that renders the Indian experience particularly distinctive within the global constitutional landscape.' On the role of courts in a democracy, he said, 'constitutional democracy is … a system where majorities are checked, where minorities are protected, and where principles cannot be sacrificed at the altar of popularity,' and 'in such a system, courts cannot function as mere referees.' He stressed, 'in a democracy as vast and diverse as India's, it is only when the judiciary wears its power lightly, and its conscience visibly, that it can remain not only the last word, but also a trusted voice among many in our collective democratic journey.' 'Judiciary may not be the most visible arm of the state, it may not command battalions or shape budgets, but it performs a task more difficult: it keeps alive the promise of justice. In India, this task has often been thankless, occasionally triumphant, and always essential. The judiciary is not a saviour; it is a sentinel. It does not march. It watches. And when necessary, it speaks—not to please, but to preserve.' Earlier, during a visit to the Washington State Supreme Court's Temple of Justice in Olympia on June 3, Justice Kant highlighted the SC's defence of free speech rights, noting that 'pre-censorship and vague notions of public order cannot trump the right to free expression,' and adding, 'these are not merely legal precedents; they are constitutional declarations—that democracy without dissent is a contradiction, and that silence in the face of injustice is not neutrality, but complicity.' Drawing parallels between the Indian and American judiciaries, he said, 'in both countries, the Judiciary has consistently pushed back against the temptation to suppress dissent under misguided and deceptive notions that the Executive may hold … Both our systems were designed not to trust power blindly, but to restrain it.' At a fireside chat at Microsoft Corporation headquarters on June 6, Justice Kant touched on the rise of technology such as artificial intelligence in the judicial process. He said he was 'firmly convinced that any contemplation of AI must be guided by a deep moral compass. Shaping the future demands more than innovation—it calls for an unwavering adherence to foundational values. Transparency, equity, responsibility, and respect for human dignity must not be afterthoughts, but the pillars upon which all technological advancement rests.' He warned that 'technology, if left unchecked, can reflect and reinforce societal inequities. AI is not a perfect technology and it can perhaps never replace the human element that the entire Rawlsian theory of justice hinges on,' and added, 'technology must remain subordinate to our higher commitments to fairness, equity, and human dignity' and 'must adapt to the lived realities of the people it seeks to serve.' Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More
New Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Assam to follow 1950 law to push back illegal immigrants without trial
GUWAHATI: Assam will follow a lesser-known 1950 law – Immigrants Expulsion Order – to push back illegal immigrants, a move that is likely to open up Pandora's box, for this is against the conventional process. Stating that the process of identifying 'foreigners', which slowed down due to matters relating to the National Register of Citizens, will now continue at a faster pace, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said: 'This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner, we will not have to take up the case with the foreigners' tribunal to push back the person.' He said during an earlier hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Supreme Court had mentioned that it was not binding on the Assam government to always approach the judiciary in order to push back foreigners. 'There is an old law – Immigrants Expulsion Order. The Supreme Court said this law is still in force. According to this law, the DC (district commissioner) has the authority to issue an order and give permission for pushback,' he said. 'For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this order and we weren't aware of it either. This came to our attention recently. We will now discuss it seriously. Meanwhile, the process of pushback will continue,' he further stated.
