Meghalaya High Court: While hearing a Public Interest Litigation, concerning the increase in traffic congestion in the Shillong city, the Division Bench of W. Diengdoh and Sanjib Banerjee, JJ., directed the State to file an affidavit, indicating their plans and goals to ease the traffic congestion in the city.
The Court noted that, several months ago, the State had indicated that most of the parents of school-going children in the city had agreed to their wards being ferried to schools by bus, provided the State Government took the responsibility of running such service. Indeed, it was indicated that about 50 to 60 buses were being acquired for such a purpose, however, nothing had been implemented in this regard till date.
Further, the State had indicated several other long-term and short-term plans, suggesting the implementation of ideas by IIM Shillong and by a foreign agency, apparently, engaged by the State for the purpose of managing the traffic. The Court said that nothing had come out of the said indicated plans, apart from a ropeway being planned, and that too, for tourism purposes.
Thus, the Court directed that the State must file an affidavit indicating the plans to be implemented in the next few months, and in coming years. A statement on long-term goals, taking into consideration the rate of increase of private cars and vehicular traffic, the burgeoning tourism industry and the available space to be indicated in the affidavit.
[Philip Khrawbok Shati v. State of Meghalaya, 2023 SCC OnLine Megh 186, decided on 17-04-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Senior Advocate H.L. Shangreiso, Advocate T. Dkhar;
For the Respondent: Additional Advocate General K. Khan, Government Advocate R. Colney, Advocate A. Pradhan, DSG N. Mozika, Advocate L. Khyriem, Advocate Philemon Nongbri.
