The court affirms that earmarked public land for sports facilities cannot be repurposed for commercial development, emphasizing urban planning obligations in maintaining accessible infrastructures for public welfare.

JUDGMENT

G. S. Kulkarni, J. -

(A) Prelude

1. As to whether vacant land earmarked from the year 2003 for a 'Government Sports Complex' at Navi Mumbai, should be sacrificed for concretization and commercial exploitation, is the issue raised in the present Public Interest Litigation.

2. The Indian Institute of Architects, Navi Mumbai Center, is before the Court in this public interest litigation, inter alia assailing the actions of respondent No.1 - City Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (for short 'CIDCO') and of the State of Maharashtra through its Sports Department and the Urban Development Department.

3. The subject matter of controversy is land admeasuring about 20 acres situated at Sector 12 and 13 ('land') at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai, which has been earmarked since 2003 by the CIDCO to be utilized for setting up a Government Sports Complex, of an international standard as per the sports policy/decision of the Government of Maharashtra under the Government Resolution dated 26 March 2003. CIDCO was constituted as a New Town Development Authority for New Bombay (now the Navi Mumbai) region by the State Government in the year 1971.

It is contended by the petitioner that with appropriate foresight and in recognition to the importance 'sports' in the contemporary times would internationally wield, about 61 acres of land in sector 12 and 13 was earmarked for a contiguous sports complex, namely, for a 'Government Sports Complex' on land admeasuring 20 acres and a Sports Complex to be set up by the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (for short 'NMMC') on the remaining 41 acres of land.

4. The case of the petitioner is that a dent was caused to such demarcation when the same was sought to be taken away when CIDCO floated a tender in August 2016 inviting bids to allot a part of the land demarcated as plot Nos. 1, 2 and 4 for residential purpose and plot no. 5 for residential and commercial use. In such tender, none other than respondent No. 5's participation was accepted, who came to be allotted plot no. 4 which was part of the land proposed to be developed as a Government Sports Complex.

5. The case of the petitioner is also that after filing of the petition, there were subsequent developments, to the effect that the Government which had intended to develop the said land at Ghansoli for Government Sports Complex, has now ostensibly proposed to set up such complex at a far off place in a rural area namely at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad, which is more than 115 kilometers away from the existing site at Ghansoli (Navi Mumbai). The petitioner contends that such place lacks the basic necessary infrastructure much less internationally accepted for a sports complex. It is hence contended by the petitioner that it is unthinkable that such decision could be taken by the State Government. This decision of the State Government, which is of a recent origin, is also challenged by the petitioner. As on date, out of 41 acres of land earmarked for NMMC, 36 acres of land has been handed over to the NMMC by CIDCO to develop its sports complex. However, the land earmarked for the contiguous government sports complex as proposed in the year 2003 is being illegally taken away to be shifted to far off place in the rural area, is the case of the petitioner. On such backdrop, respondent No.5 who has been allotted a part of the land earmarked for the government sports complex is asserting to develop the land as allotted to it by C