E-Paper
Amid Covid-19 management, Tribune flyover project put on the back burner
In November last year, the Punjab and Haryana high court, while staying the removal of trees for the project’s construction, had asked the UT adviser to seek public views on alternatives for the project. UT is yet to submit that report.
With the UT administration scrambling to stem the spread of Covid-19, the controversial Tribune flyover project has been relegated to the background.
The ₹183-crore project—flyover, underpass and elevated rotary—was approved by the Union ministry of road transport and highways (MoRTH) in February 2019 to decongest the Tribune rotary on the Dakshin Marg.
But in November last year, the Punjab and Haryana high court, while staying the removal of trees for the project’s construction, had asked the UT adviser to seek public views on alternatives for the project. UT is yet to submit the report with the HC, further leading to uncertainty over the much-hyped project.
REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED SOON: PARIDA
UT adviser Manoj Kumar Parida said that the UT will soon submit the report with the HC. It was delayed because senior UT officials had recommended taking the views of the administrator’s advisory council on the issue, he said, adding, in the current circumstances, the administration is unlikely to take the council’s views.
“As uncertainty continues to prevail over the project, the delay will cause price escalation of construction. An early decision on the matter should be pursued so that if the flyover is constructed, even with changed design, its cost shouldn’t become too high,” said a UT engineering department official.
On December 23, comments from the public were invited on the flyover project. Of the total 78 persons/groups that came forward, 53 were against the project. Later, the administration also took views of Punjab and Haryana governments. Earlier this year, the MC had passed a resolution in favour of the administration’s plan to construct the flyover.
TECHNICAL PANEL CONSTITUTED
After the hearing, the UT adviser, last year, had constituted a technical committee headed by the UT finance secretary to examine the technical suggestions on alternatives to the project.
The committee comprising senior UT officials and chief engineers from Punjab, Haryana and the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) had termed the alternatives as unviable. In the report, the committee analysed each of the seven alternatives and gave conclusions on each, individually. The reasons for rejection of each project were also given.
Rejecting all alternatives, the committee had recommended that the opinion of MoRTH on the issue should also be taken. But the UT had rejected this recommendation, and instead is mulling to take the MC’s advice.
