Jharkhand High Court: In a Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) filed by the petitioner seeking directions for immediate reconstruction and repair of the Hata-Tiring National Highway 220 (‘NH-220’), particularly a 4-Km stretch from Rasunchopa to the Tiring border, which was in a severely dilapidated condition, the Division Bench of M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ., and Rajesh Shankar, J., closed the PIL after the respondents filed a completion certificate confirming the completion of road work.
The petitioner, an advocate, had filed this PIL in 2024 concerning the severe dilapidated condition of the NH-220, which connects Jharkhand and Odisha. The PIL had highlighted that the 4-km stretch from Rasunchopa to the Tiring border in Potka Block, East Singhbhum District, had been in disrepair since 2018. The ongoing deterioration was significantly impacting local communities and impeding economic activities in the region. The PIL alleged that the State Government had failed to acquire necessary land for widening the road for over five years, leading to inordinate delays. This delay resulted in the contractor returning allocated funds, further stalling the project and leaving the road in a dangerous state. Local communities were facing severe difficulties, including vehicle damage, cessation of bus and taxi services, and isolation of villages.
The petitioner submitted that Section 5 of the National Highways Act, 1956, mandates the Central Government to develop and maintain national highways, a duty which can be delegated to State Governments. Despite this statutory obligation, the respondents had allegedly failed to maintain the NH-220 stretch, leading to its dilapidated state. The petitioner further submitted that under Article 21 of the Constitution, citizens have a fundamental right to good roads.
The petitioner emphasised that Supreme Court in Sudhir Madan v. MCD, (2009) 17 SCC 597, held that citizens possess a fundamental right to use public conveniences, including roads, and their deprivation due to poor conditions infringes constitutional rights and exposes them to grave danger.
It was further contended that Madhu Kaur v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2009 SCC OnLine Del 1842, the Delhi High Court while awarding compensation in case of death of the petitioner’s son owing to bad condition of the roads, after getting imbalanced died after hitting a pit (khada), held that the authorities should be conscious and aware of their duty to maintain roads and ensure that the road surface does not have any pits or khada to cause accidents, thus resulting in injuries and even loss of life. It is the obligation and responsibility of the road owning agencies to ensure that the roads are maintained properly, and repairs are undertaken. Even if they have entered third-party contracts for road maintenance, road users should not suffer from injuries, fatal or otherwise, because of a lack of maintenance, proper care, and repairs. In case accidents take place resulting from negligence and failure to maintain roads, damages can always be awarded to persons who have suffered or lost a near and dear one. Loss of life because of negligence of state instrumentalities results in a violation of the right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
In light of the afore-stated submissions by the petitioner, the Court issued notice to the respondents, including the Union of India, the Department of Road Construction, Jharkhand, and the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), directing them to file a counter-affidavit.
Thereafter, upon considering the affidavits, status report and completion certificate filed by the respondents stating that the road work on the concerned stretch of NH-220 had been completed on 06-05-2025, the Court closed the PIL.
[Akash Sharma v. Union of India, W.P.(PIL) No. 5110 of 2024, decided on 24-06-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Petitioner in person
For the Respondent: Abhijeet Kumar Singh, CGC, Sahbaj Akhtar, AC to AAG-III, Sweety Topno, Amrit Raj Kisku, Advocates
