The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday, 15 May stayed the felling of trees earmarked for the proposed Tribune Chowk flyover in Chandigarh, halting construction preparations pending a final judicial verdict. The interim order effectively puts the ₹200 crore project on hold.

What the Court Ordered

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjeev Berry restrained the Chandigarh Administration and all other respondents from felling any mango tree or any other tree in the vicinity of Tribune Chowk. The Bench clarified that 'the interim direction shall remain subject to the final outcome in the petition,' noting that the matter had already been heard and was likely to be decided at an early date. The court had reserved its judgment on Wednesday.

Who Petitioned and Why

The petition was filed by Jagwant Bath and other petitioners who raised environmental concerns and challenged what they described as an assault on Chandigarh's heritage character. They argued that the Chandigarh Master Plan of 2031 — a statutory document notified under the Capital of Punjab Act, 1952 and the Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952 — does not recommend the construction of flyovers within the city. The plan, they contended, mandates that alternative traffic management measures be explored first.

The petitioners also claimed that the Department of Urban Planning was initially opposed to the project, holding the view that the Master Plan does not permit it.

Project Background and Cost Escalation

The flyover project was first conceived in 2016 to decongest the Tribune roundabout, a key junction through which most traffic entering the city passes. The Chandigarh Administration received approval from the Union Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) to proceed. The proposed 1.6-km structure is designed to begin after the Government Medical College and Hospital in the Sector 32 roundabout and end ahead of the railway overbridge on Dakshin Marg.

Repeated procedural delays, however, have significantly inflated costs — from ₹137 crore in 2019 to ₹200 crore now, a 45% rise over seven years. This escalation has added urgency to questions about whether the project should proceed at all, or whether less ecologically disruptive traffic solutions should be adopted instead.

What Happens Next

With judgment reserved, the court's final ruling will determine whether the flyover can proceed as planned or whether the administration must explore alternative traffic management approaches consistent with the Master Plan. The stay on tree felling remains in force until that verdict is delivered. The case underscores a broader tension in Indian urban planning between infrastructure expansion and environmental preservation — particularly in heritage cities like Chandigarh, which was designed by Le Corbusier and carries a distinct planning legacy.