1. This D.B. Civil Contempt Petition has been filed for alleged violation of an undertaking given by learned counsel appearing for the Jaipur Development Authority, under which 200 bighas of land was to be reserved for maintaining ecological zone in Jaipur in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4694/2003 (Yashwant Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.).

2. It is alleged that Master Plan is being amended frequently, and that, the undertaking given to the Court has been breached in violation of the provisions of the Jaipur Development Authority Act. In the additional affidavit of Bishnu Charan Mallick, the then Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority filed on 01.11.2012, reference was made of notification dated 09.11.2006 for land measuring 205.18 bighas/biswas changed from rural use to ecological in Revenue Villages Malpura Chod and Malpura Doongar, Tehsil Jaipur, District, Jaipur, and the notification dated 24.02.2007, in which land measuring 10391.10 bighas/biswas was changed from rural use to ecological use in Revenue Villages Ram Singhpura, Hinghonia Bhatesari, Bhurthal, Kanadwas and Sindoli, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur. Both the notifications are annexed to the affidavit.

3. This Court vide its order dated 10.09.2012, directed the respondents to point out the changes made in violation of the Master Plan and the permissions granted by the State Government. In the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the Jaipur Development Authority on 21.08.2013, five instances are given, where the land use was changed from ecological to commercial, and ecological to industrial and institutional. The contents of paragraphs 2 & 3 of the affidavit of Bishnu Charan Mallick are quoted as below:-

“2. That vide order dated 10.9.2012 the Hon'ble High Court directed the Respondent No.2 & 3 to file a specific Affidavit stating as to how many cases, there is a violation of the Master Plan and when permission of the same was granted. That in lieu of the same the Humble Respondent states that following changes from Ecological use to Commercial, Industrial & Institutional uses have been made:-

(i) Abhay Khandelwal C/o M/s. Goverdhan Dham Estate (P) Ltd. In Revenue Village Kukas bearing Khasra No.938/2278, 935, 937, 937/2279, 937/2281, 938, 938/2282, 939, 939/2276, 939/2277, 939/2277/2290, 939.2277/2291, 939/2283 Tehsil Amer finalized on 2.7.2010.

(ii) Smt. Bhagwati Devi in Revenue Village Nangal Susawatan bearing Khasra No.28 to 32, 130 to 135 Tehsil Amer finalized on 4.6.2010.

(iii) Dinesh Kumar Sharma Revenue Village Daulatpura bearing Khasra No.1047 Tehsil Amer finalized on 10.8.2010.

(iv) Jenpect Revenue Village Jamdoli bearing Khasra No.165 fe- o 448 fe- Tehsil Jaipur finalized on 06.10.2008.

(v) ICFAI Revenue Village Jamdoli bearing Khasra No.505/1 Tehsil Jaipur finalized on 06.10.2008.

3. That in the aforesaid land, uses have been changed from – Ecological to Commercial in point no. i) to iii), case no. iv) – Ecological to Industrial and in point no. v) – Ecological to Institutional by following appropriate process as laid down in JDA Act and allied laws.”

4. It is submitted that the land use is being changed contrary to the provisions of Sections 25(1), 25(2) & 25(4) of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, and in which 200 bighas of land, earlier reserved, in pursuance to the undertaking given to the Court, has been diverted for private use by permitting the change of land use.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the Jaipur Development Authority as well as the officers, who have been arrayed as respondents, submit that this issue was discussed in detail, and that, it was found that the undertaking given by the Jaipur Development Authority was not static, and that, in view of the provisions of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, the land use could be changed to allow the planned growth of the City. In EIH Associated Hotels Limited Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2009 (2) WLC (Raj.) 228, the same issue with regard to the directions given,