2002 Supreme(SC) 148
2002(6) Supreme 205
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.N. Khare and Ashok Bhan, JJ.
Vishwa Chetna Trust & Anr. - Appellants
versus
R.P.C. Layout Residents Welfare Association & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 785 of 1997
Decided on 30-1-2002
Headnote:Bangalore Development Authority Act 1926-Section 2(bb) read with Clause 3 of Bangalore Development Authority (Amendment) Act, 1988-Civil amenity-Allotment of land to educational Trust-Allotment challenged by Residents Association on ground applications were not invited from eligible applicants-Pending writ petition Act came to be amended validating allotments made by authorities-High Court, however, set aside allotment without adverting to effect of amendment-Unsustainable-Amendment was not challenged-By virtue of amendment allotment of disputed land stood validated-Judgment of High Court set aside. (Paras 3, 4, 5 & 6)
ORDER
The appellant No. 1 herein is a public charitable trust established with the objects, inter alia, of running educational institutions. It is alleged that appellants have already running a Kannada medium high school and a junior college. There is a piece of land numbered as site No. 22 within the limits of Bangalore Municipal Corporation. The said land vests in the Bangalore Development Authority, hereinafter referred to as "the authority" constituted and established under the Bangalore Development Authority Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". The said site falls within the comprehensive development plan. Civic amenity is defined under section 2(bb) of the Act. The definition of civic amenities as originally stood runs as under:
"2(bb) Civic amenity means:-
(iv) A centre for educational, religious, social or cultural activities or for philanthropic service run by a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (Karnataka Act 11 of 1959) or a society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (Karnataka Act 17 of 1960) or by a trust created wholly for charitable, educational or religious purposes."
2. Subsequently, the said definition of civic amenity was amended by The Bangalore Development Authority (Amendment) Act, 1988 which runs as under:
"Civic amenity means:
(i) a market, a post office, a telephone exchange, a bank, a fair price shop, a milk booth, a school, a dispensary, a hospital, a pathological laboratory, a maternity home, a child care centre, a library, a gymnasium, a bus stand or a bus depot;
(ii) a recreation centre run by the government or the corporation;
(iii) a centre for educational, social or cultural activities established by the central government or the state government or by a body established by the central government or the state government;
(iv) A centre for educational, religious, social or cultural activities or for philanthropic service run by a cooperative society registered under the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, 1959 (Karnataka Act 11 of 1959) or a society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (Karnataka Act 17 of 1960) or by a trust created wholly for charitable, educational or religious purposes;
(v) a police station, an area office or a service station of the corporation or the Bangalore water supply and sewerage board or the Karnataka electricity board; and
(vi) such other amenity as the government may, by notification, specify.
3. By the said amendment, the definition of civic amenity was enlarged and also included educational, social or cultural activities run by a trust which is wholly charitable, educational or religious purposes. In between time, the appellant herein applied to the authority for allotment of the aforesaid site in its favour for setting up a Kannada primary school and junior college. The authority, after having found that the requirement of the appellant is bona fide and is for educational purposes, it granted the lease of the said land in favour of the appellant for a period of 30 years. After the land was leased out to the appellants, respondent No. 1 RPC layout residents welfare association filed a public interest litigation by means of a petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging the allotment of the aforesaid plot of land in favour of the appellant. While the said public interest litigation was pending, the Karnataka Legislature by amending Act 18 of 1991 amended the Act. By clause 2 of the amending Act original section 38A was substituted by new section 38A and by clause 3 of the said amending Act all allotments made or action taken by the authority were validated. Clauses 2 and 3 of the amending Act run as under:
"38A, Grant of area reserved for civic amenities etc.-(1) The authority shall have the power to lease, sell or otherwise transfer any area reserved