HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Sandeep Mehta, Vinod Kumar Bharwani, JJ.
Ratan Singh Rathore & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10843 of 2021
Decided On : 07-05-2022
Public Interest Litigation - Gochar Land - The court upheld the action of the respondents in using Gochar land for construction of a Panchayat Bhawan, citing compliance with statutory provisions and compensation for the land taken.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the use of Gochar land for construction of a Panchayat Bhawan, alleging non-compliance with statutory provisions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the action of the respondents was taken after due compliance with statutory provisions and upheld the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan.
Issues: Grievance against the use of Gochar land for construction, compliance with statutory provisions, and compensation for the land taken.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Division Bench Judgment in a similar case and concluded that the action of the respondents was in accordance with the law.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of in favor of the respondents, upholding the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan on the Gochar land.
JUDGMENT
1. The instant writ petition in the nature of Public Interest
2. Litigation has been preferred by the petitioners herein with the following prayers:
'a/ By an appropriate writ order or direction, the proposal dated 10.01.2020/04.10.2021 (annex-01) and order dated 19.02.2021 (annex.05) & entry dated 06.07.2021 in Jamabandi (annex.10) may kindly be quashed & set aside.
B/ By an appropriate writ order or direction, the Respondents may kindly be restrained from changing the nature of the Gochar land situated in Khasra No. 313 situated in Village Lorta Haridasota and in meantime if the same is changed then Respondents be directed to restore the same.
C/ By an appropriate writ order or direction, the Respondents may kindly be restrained from raising any type of construction on the Gochar land situated in Khasra No. 313 at Village Lorta Haridasota, Tehsil Sekhla, District Jodhpur.'
3. The petitioner has raised a grievance against the action ofthe respondents in using 2.10 Bighas of Gochar land bearing Khasra No.313 at Village Lorta Haridasota, Tehsil Sekhala, District Jodhpur for the purpose of raising construction of a Panchayat Bhawan.
4. Shri Sunil Beniwal, learned aaG submits that the order to allot 2.10 Bighas of land for the purpose of raising construction of Panchayat Bhawan was passed after following the due process of law. Land of equal measurement was set apart for compensating the land which was taken from the Gochar area for the purpose of raising the construction of Panchayat Bhawan. The building of Panchayat Bhawan has already been constructed. He placed reliance on the Judgment dated 20.10.2021 rendered by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sangram Singh & Ors. vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6523/2021) and implored the Court to dismiss the writ petition.
5. We have heard and considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel representing the petitioners and the learned aaG and, have gone through the material available on record.
6. We are of the firm view that the impugned action whereby, the respondents set apart 2.10 Bighas of land from the Gochar are of the Village Lorta Haridasota for construction of a Panchayat Bhawan was taken after due compliance of the statutory provisions. Land of equal area allotted for the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan has been set apart for compensating the Gochar area. The construction of the Panchayat Bhawan has already been completed and thus, no direction can be given to demolish the same.
7. The controversy at hand is squarely covered by the Division Bench Judgment in the case of Sangram Ram (supra) and hence, the instant writ petition is disposed of in light thereof.
Compliance with statutory provisions and compensation for the use of Gochar land for construction purposes.
The administration has the discretion to decide the location of government/public buildings, and the court will not interfere unless the decision is irrational, arbitrary, or mala fide.
The court emphasized that new issues cannot be raised in a writ petition that were not raised before the lower courts, and the court cannot adjudicate the appropriate location for the construction of....
The court will not interfere with the decision of the State authorities regarding the construction of public buildings unless there is evidence of malafides or violation of statutory rules.
The petitioner must demonstrate malafide or violation of law to challenge the allotment of land for construction.
The court emphasized the importance of demonstrating malafide or violation of law in challenging administrative decisions such as land allotment.
Administrative decisions regarding land allotment are upheld unless malafide intent or legal violations are proven.
Administrative procedures must be followed in land allocation for public projects to ensure rightful possession is respected.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.