High Court Commission to Inspect Gurgaon Road Widths Amid Construction Policy Dispute
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken a decisive step in the ongoing legal battle over Haryana's controversial "stilt-plus-four" (S+4) residential construction policy by constituting a three-member commission. This panel has been tasked with a critical mission: to physically inspect and accurately measure the width of internal roads in Gurgaon's residential sectors and licensed colonies. The court's directive comes as a direct response to conflicting claims about the actual dimensions of these roads, which have emerged as a central point of contention in public interest litigation challenging the policy's implementation.
Judicial Intervention in Policy Implementation
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry issued this order while hearing multiple petitions that fundamentally challenge the Haryana government's decision to permit construction of four floors plus stilt parking on residential plots, particularly in Gurgaon's already developed areas. The petitioners, represented by advocates including Nivedita Sharma, have raised serious concerns about the policy's alignment with expert recommendations and its practical implications for urban infrastructure.
The Core of the Controversy: Road Width Specifications
At the heart of this legal dispute lies a significant modification made by the state government to expert committee recommendations. The original committee, constituted by the government in 2023, had specifically recommended that S+4 construction in existing colonies should only be permitted on plots adjacent to roads measuring at least 12 meters in width. However, the state government reduced this requirement to 10 meters, presenting statistical justification that only 19 percent of plots in Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP) sectors abut 12-meter roads, while 61 percent are adjacent to 10-meter roads, making the stricter limit what they termed "impractical" for widespread implementation.
The petitioners have presented compelling counter-evidence, including photographic documentation suggesting that many internal roads in Gurgaon colonies have actual motorable (tarred) widths of only 4.5 to 6 meters. They argue that the stated 10-meter width often includes footpaths and planted areas that don't contribute to vehicular movement space. This discrepancy between official measurements and ground reality has become a crucial factor in the court's deliberations.
Infrastructure Concerns and Policy Defenses
Beyond the road width issue, petitioners have raised comprehensive concerns about Gurgaon's civic infrastructure capacity. They cited the expert committee's 2023 report which highlighted severe deficiencies in multiple areas including sewage treatment systems, water supply networks, parking facilities, traffic management, structural safety standards, air pollution control, and tree conservation efforts. The legal challenge contends that thousands of additional construction permissions granted since 2023 have already placed unsustainable strain on Gurgaon's infrastructure, resulting in hazardous air quality with AQI consistently exceeding 800 in recent months, increased flooding incidents, and groundwater contamination issues.
Haryana's additional advocate-general presented the government's defense, arguing that the administration had accepted several committee recommendations while making practical modifications for implementation. The defense highlighted ongoing infrastructure augmentation projects funded by over Rs 1,178 crore collected from S+4 approvals until June 2023. Government representatives also emphasized that halting construction would exacerbate housing shortages in the rapidly growing urban center.
Commission Formation and Judicial Timeline
Recognizing the fundamental disagreement about ground realities, the High Court bench has established a balanced commission structure. The three-member panel will include a nominee of the additional advocate-general representing the state government, counsel for the petitioners, and the chief judicial magistrate of Gurgaon or their representative. This composition ensures representation from all stakeholders in the dispute.
The commission has been directed to conduct thorough inspections across Gurgaon's residential areas and submit a comprehensive report within 10 days. Based on this timeline, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has scheduled the next hearing for after the receipt of the commission's findings, deferring further arguments until the factual basis of road widths has been conclusively established through independent verification.
This judicial intervention represents a significant development in the ongoing debate about sustainable urban development in Gurgaon, balancing construction needs against infrastructure limitations and environmental concerns. The commission's findings are likely to have substantial implications for future construction approvals and urban planning decisions in one of India's most rapidly developing metropolitan regions.
