2009 Supreme(Gau) 122
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Jasti Chelameswar, Arun Chandra Upadhyay, JJ.
Md. Sahidur Rahman – Appellants
Vs.
Union of India (UOI) and Ors. – Respondent
Decided On: 18.02.2009
Public interest litigation should not be used for personal gain or private profit and should genuinely involve public interest.
Headnote:
PIL - Jurisdictional Dispute - Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India - [Forest Conservation Act, 1980 - Section 2, Section 3] - The court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed to retain two Sand cum Gravel Mahals under the jurisdiction of Dhubri Forest Division of the Govt. of Assam, outside the jurisdiction of Bodoland Territorial Council (B.T.C). The petitioner alleged that the B.T.C was illegally claiming administrative control of the Mahals, causing public resentment. The court found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any genuine reason for apprehension and did not establish any legal infirmity in the government's action. The court cited the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India and emphasized that the transfer of supervision and management of the Mahals from one government wing to another did not curtail the constitutional rights of non-Bodo people. The court also highlighted the need for scrutiny in public interest litigation, emphasizing that it should not be used for personal gain or private profit.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a PIL to retain two Sand cum Gravel Mahals under the jurisdiction of Dhubri Forest Division of the Govt. of Assam, outside the jurisdiction of Bodoland Territorial Council (B.T.C), alleging illegal administrative control by B.T.C, causing public resentment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any genuine reason for apprehension and did not establish any legal infirmity in the government's action. The court dismissed the PIL, stating that it was filed without any public interest involved.
Issues: Jurisdictional dispute between Dhubri Forest Division and Bodoland Territorial Council, Alleged illegal administrative control, Public resentment
Ratio Decidendi: The transfer of supervision and management of the Mahals from one government wing to another did not curtail the constitutional rights of non-Bodo people. Public interest litigation should not be used for personal gain or private profit.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the PIL, stating that it was filed without any public interest involved.
A.C. Upadhyay, J.
1. Heard Mr. G.U. Ahmed, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. B. Goyal, Learned Counsel for State respondents. Also heard Mr. K. Das, learned Standing Counsel, B.T.C.
2. This Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to retain Khoraghat Sand cum Gravel Mahal and Soulmari Sand cum Gravel Mahal, located outside the jurisdiction of Bodoland Territorial Council (B.T.C), under the jurisdiction of Dhubri Forest Division of the Govt. of Assam. The petitioner has stated in the writ petition that Khoraghat Sand and Gravel Mahal and Soulmari Sand cum Gravel Mahal, both located on the riverbed of Sonkosh/Tipkai rivers, are Situated within the administrative jurisdiction of Dhubri Forest Division of Government of Assam. It has been alleged by the petitioner that Bodoland Territorial Council has been illegally claiming administrative control of Khoraghat Sand and Gravel Mahal. The petitioner submits that the aforesaid unjustified claim of the Bodoland Territorial Council has caused public resentment.
It will be pertinent to quote the prayer of the writ petitioner, which is as follows:
In the premises aforesaid your humble petitioner prays to your Lordship " to be graciously pleased to admit this PIL Petition, call for the record, issue rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, direction or order of like nature should not be issued to the effect that the Khoraghat Sand cum ' Gravel Mahal and Soulamari Sand cum Gravel Mahal being located out side the jurisdiction of Boro territorial council and inside the jurisdiction of the Dhubri Forest Division, shall be retained under the jurisdiction of the Dhubri Forest Division under Government of Assam.
3. Facts leading to filing of this P.I.L. are as follows:
That, Khoraghat Sand and Gravel Mahal and Soulmari Sand cum Gravel Mahal are operating under the administrative control of the Dhubri Forest Division, as they are situated outside the Bodoland Territorial Council area and the issue relating to transfer of the aforesaid two Sand-and-Gravel Mahals occurred only when the Conservator of Forest, Council Head of Department of Forest, Bodoland Territorial Council, Kokrajhar, the respondent No. 8 in the writ petition, wrote Annexure-A/2 letter No. F.24/Dhubri/Khoraghar/SGM/2006-08 dated 9.8.2006, to the Chief Conservator of Forest (T), Assam claiming to operate Khoraghat Sand and Gravel Mahal by them. However, upon plain reading of the said letter at Annexure-A/2, it transpires that intact a request was made by respondent No. 8, on behalf of the Bodoland Territorial Council, in order to ensure proper management and operation of Khoraghat Sand cum Gravel Mahal to enable the Officer in charge of the Range to control illegalities in the forest adjoining the river Mahal as the Range Office is strategically located for controlling the illegalities in the river Mahal and forests situated in the surrounding area.
4. The petitioner affirmed that though the Government of Assam has not yet announced its final decision regarding the allotment of these Mahals, nevertheless, Bodoland Territorial Council authorities, have been purportedly interfering with the normal functioning of the Dhubri Forest Division. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner deduced that if the said Mahals are transferred to Bodoland Territorial Council areas, it would jeopardize the rights and privileges of the non-Bodo people living near the said two Mahals.
5. As a matter of fact, Bodoland Territorial Council is an Autonomous District created within the State of Assam, in terms of the provisions of the Sixth Scheduler to the Constitution of India. In our opinion, there cannot be any rationale, whatsoever to broach a question of curtailment of constitutional rights of non-Bodo people, notwithstanding transfer of supervision and management of Sand cum Gravel Mahals from one wing to another wing of the Gover