Legal Data by
August 8, 2017
August 8, 2017
August 8, 2017
The construction of an ambitious steel flyover at Shivananda Circle in Bengaluru had been facing repeated delays since 2016 on account of opposition from residents. The project, seeking to ease traffic congestion in the city, was initially commissioned at an estimated cost of INR 14.48 crore, which quickly escalated to INR 22.89 crore when the work order was granted in October 2017. In the same year, local residents filed a writ petition in the Karnataka high court seeking a stay on the project. Anticipating that once constructed, it would worsen the traffic congestion in the city, the residents claimed the proposed flyover to be an unnecessary and counterproductive addition to the city's existing infrastructure. Their claim was further substantiated by notable scientists and researchers, including Professor M.N. Sreehari, advisor to the state government for traffic, transport and infrastructure, who referred to the project as "technically unsound, unviable". Additionally, R.K. Jaigopal, member of Indian Roads Congress, confirmed that the proposed project would create additional traffic hurdles instead of solving them. In 2018, the court ordered for the project to be revised in lieu of the objections and IRC guidelines. The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) ultimately received a clearance to execute the project on April 17, 2020, at a revised cost of INR 39 crore. As per a report published on June 12, 2021, BBMP Chief Commissioner Gaurav Gupta informed that the pending issues at the construction site had been resolved and that the project was on track for completion by 2021.
Complaint against procedural violations
Demand for better access to common land/resources
Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)
Total investment involved (in Crores):
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
Page Number In Investment Document:
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
High Court of Karnataka
I.A. No. 4/2017 in Writ Petition No. 47168/2017 (GM-RES) PIL
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nature of Protest
Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict: