The policy decision of the State Government to allot land to ISBM was not subject to judicial review as it was not arbitrary, unreasonable, or violative of any constitutional or legal provisions.

M. S. LIBERHAN, C. J.

( 1 ) HYDERABAD Urban Development Authority (for short huda ) took over 1000. 23 acres of Poramboke and Kancha Sircari agricultural land of village manikonda because of industrialization and Urbanization around it. Indian school of Business Management (for short isb ) was allotted 250 acres by government for imparting training to the students in the field of Business management and allied fields from all over the world.

( 2 ) IN view of the proximity of its location to the Indian Institute ofinformation and Technology (for short iiit ) and other large number of educational institutions having come up like Telecommunications Training centre and Institute of Department of Telecommunications, Government of india, Environmental Protection, Training and Research Institute, Jawaharlal nehru Institute of Banking (promoted by IDBI), the ambience of the area, establishment of National University in 200 acres of area etc. , a memorandum of Understanding was entered on 06-09-1998.

( 3 ) THE appellant impugned the allotment as public interest, inter alia,contending that Government land cultivated by the landless farmers or the ryots, around the village are entitled to grant of pattas/assignments of it being under their self-cultivation to the extent of 5 acres as well as they being the members of the Weaker Sections of the Society. It was averred that the Court while disposing of the writ petition of the various claimants of above nature directed the District Collector to consider the claim of the claimants in the writ petition. The Collector declined the claim of the claimants to be in continuous possession or their belonging to Weaker Sections of the Society or having pattedar rights under 1950 Act or being ryots they being in possession of the land belonging to the Government for an uninterrupted possession and directed the eviction of encroachers occupying the land from time to time vide order dated 29-1-1997, which was impugned in Writ Petition No. 28712 of 1998; which are still pending for consideration though no stay was granted. The appellants were not party to the petition. Further challenge to the allotment was that the Government had no authority in law to part away with its natural resources according to its whims and fancies, at a price lesser than the price prevailing in the market of rupees one lakh per acre while the allotment was made at rupees twenty five thousand per acre, thereby resulting in a loss of rupees 1. 87 crores to the State; alienation not being consistent with the constitutionally permissible objective, the allotment was made without following proper procedure and was not for any decipherable public purpose, it being a gift of Government especially by the Chief Minister to private company incorporated, which would deprive the poor farmers of their livelihood and cultivation. It was further alleged that the people of Andhra pradesh would not derive any benefit from the allotment. The decision is tainted by extraneous consideration and lack of transparency apart from it being unreasonable. The allotment was in violation of established practice or law or disposal of Government largess by inviting tenders or public auction. It was averred that there were neither any negotiations with any individual or organization nor anybody else from the public was invited for the same.

( 4 ) THE State claimed the allotment to be in public interest as the establishment of the school is for the benefit of the people of the State and the country. There would be direct investment of rupees 350 crores in the state. The allotment is consisted with the public policy and the objective of the State policy for establishing a centre of excellence and providing opportunity for education. Innumerable parameters were taken into consideration in making the decision for allotment in public interest. An elaborate process was undertaken before allotment. There was neither any extraneous consideration nor it suffered f

Click Here to Read the rest of this document