Court refuses to halt tunnel construction ‘feared to affect’ Bengaluru’s Hebbal lake

Three petitioners—Guruprasad R K, Rishvanjas Raghavan, and Elizabeth Soumya—moved the court arguing that section 12 of the Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority Act 2014 prohibited the government from undertaking any construction within 30 metres of the lake.

Advocate-General Shashi Kiran Shetty submitted that no land from the lake bed would be taken for the tunnel construction and that only 3.45 acres of land below the lake’s buffer zone would be used. He also assured the court that “no restriction will be imposed on use of the lake for any purpose”.

The petitioners’ counsel sought interim protection in the form of a direction not to use the land near the lake.

The bench said, “They have given a detailed reply. Before we pass any interim order, we must be satisfied that the inflow and outflow of the water is being obstructed. Merely because they are constructing a tunnel, we cannot do it. This is a contentious issue, and we understand that.”

The court directed the advocate-general to inform it by September 10 about when the engineer would make the presentation.

A toll-free tunnel to decongest traffic

The short tunnel project is one of the projects undertaken to ease traffic congestion. The project is being implemented by the Greater Bengaluru Authority and the Bengaluru Development Authority. It was determined that no further widening of the road, which is part of the national highway, would be possible.

The project involves constructing an underpass in the middle of Bellary Road at Mekhri Circle—without disturbing vehicle movement—an underground route on the GKVK campus, and a road on either side of the Hebbal lake.

The 2.5-km-long tunnel will be toll-free and is expected to be completed in 18 months at a cost of Rs 1,385 crore.

‘Declare the 2025 amendment unconstitutional’

In 2025, the government amended section 12 of the Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority Act and permitted construction works where the original capacity of the tanks is not reduced or the natural inflow or outflow of water is not obstructed.

Appearing for the petitioners, counsel Sneha Nagaraj said, “This short tunnel is under the tank bed, where there are several stormwater drains. In the government’s own DPR (detailed project report), there is an admission that the tank inflow will be affected due to this project. Further, referring to news reports, it is submitted that officials have come on record on this. There is no scientific study carried out before touching upon the underground of the tank bed.”

The plea requests the court to cancel the DPR, declare the 2025 amendment unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 (equality before the law) and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution, and strike it down.