Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the utility and necessity of the Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) Corridor in the city of Indore, a division bench of Suresh Kumar Kait, CJ., and Vivek Jain, J., directed the State to remove the BRTS corridor as per its policy decision.
The instant PIL raised concerns over the continued relevance of the BRTS Corridor, citing increasing traffic congestion and changes in government policies. Pursuant to the order dated 23-09-2024, a five-member expert committee was constituted to evaluate the issue. The committee concluded that due to subsequent developments, policy changes, and a substantial increase in traffic volume, the BRTS Corridor had lost its utility in the present scenario.
The State Government submitted an affidavit dated 27-02-2025 and stated that over the past 12 years, Indore has undergone significant population growth and urban expansion. It was stated that the BRTS Corridor has led to continuous traffic congestion, particularly during peak hours. It was stated that initially, the State Government defended the construction of the BRTS, but due to changing circumstances, a policy decision was taken to remove the BRTS Corridor and replace it with a series of seven flyovers. The flyovers are intended to improve traffic mobility by providing two parallel roads where the BRTS Corridor currently exists.
Given that the petitioners, the committee, and the State Government all agreed that the BRTS Project in Indore was no longer useful, the Court directed the State and stakeholders to proceed with removing the BRTS Corridor in accordance with the policy decision.
The Court noted that a related petition was filed seeking further orders on maintaining the status quo, removing the AICTL bus stand, stopping unauthorized buses in the BRTS Corridor, and initiating an inquiry.
The Court disposed of the petition as infructuous, considering the State Government’s policy decision. Further, in light of the order directing the removal of the BRTS Corridor, the Court stated that no further orders were deemed necessary, and the related petition is also disposed of in similar terms.
[Kishore Deepak Kodwani v. State of M.P., Writ Petition No. 36413 of 2024, Decided on 27-02-2025]
*Judgment by Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Shri Amit S. Agrawal Senior Advocate (amicus curiae) With Arjun Agrawal, Counsel for the Petitioners in the respective cases.
Shri Ajinkya Dagaonkar, Counsel for the Petitioner in the respective cases
Shri Kishore Deepak Kodwani – Petitioner in person in the respective cases
Shri Prashant Singh, Advocate General with Shri Amit Seth, Additional Advocate General, Shri Abhijeet Awasthi, Deputy Advocate General and Shri Ritwik Parashar, Government Advocate, Counsel for the Respondent/State in the respective cases.
Shri Anand Soni, Additional Advocate General, Indore, Counsel for the Respondent/State in the respective cases
Shri Ashutosh Gondli, Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 and 4