Right To Safe & Motorable Roads Part Of Fundamental Right To Life Under Article 21 : Supreme Court

Observing that the right to safe, well-maintained, and motorable roads is recognised as a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court today (July 30) reminded that, instead of contracting out the construction of the road to a private player, the state should take the responsibility for the development maintenance of the roads directly under its control.

“The Madhya Pradesh Highways Act, 2004... reiterates the State's role in the development, construction, and maintenance of roads in the State. Since the right to access any part of the country, with certain exceptions and restrictions under certain circumstances, is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, and the right to safe, well-maintained, and motorable roads is recognised as a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it is the responsibility of the State to develop and maintain the roads directly under its control.”, the court observed.

The bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan made this observation while deciding a case where the Appellant, a private entity, was aggrieved by the MP High Court's decision to allow the MPRDC (MP Govt. Undertaking) Writ Petition against it.

The Appellant argued that no writ petition can be held maintainable against a private entity.

Therefore, one of the questions that appeared before the Court of whether a Writ Petition would be maintainable by the State against the private entity, which was assigned a work contract to construct a road in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

While upholding the High Court's decision allowing the State's writ petition, the judgment authored by Justice Mahadevan observed that the writ was maintainable despite the private status of the Appellant, as the dispute pertained to a public function, namely, the development of road infrastructure. However, the Court also cautioned against the State outsourcing such essential functions to private entities, emphasizing that the responsibility to develop and maintain roads lies squarely with the State.

" The contract for laying of a State Highway/District Road, when assigned by the Corporation owned and run by the government, assumes the character of a public function – even if performed by a private party – and would satisfy the functionality test to sustain the writ petition. Accordingly, in view of the statutory framework and the nature of relief sought, the writ petition involves a public lawnelement and was thus maintainable before the High Court," the Court held.

Also from the judgment - Disputes Arising Out Of 'Work Contract' With MP Govt Instrumentality Shall Be Referred To MP Arbitration Tribunal : Supreme Court

Cause Title: UMRI POOPH PRATAPPUR (UPP) TOLLWAYS PVT. LTD. VERSUS M.P. ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 752

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sadapurna Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Kumar, Adv. Manvi Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajat Mittal, AOR

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Siddharth Sharma, AOR Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Rajeshwari Shankar, Adv. Ms. Ishika Chauhan, Adv.