HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, JJ.
Rewat Ram, S/o. Rupa Ram Mali and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Rural Department and Panchayati Raj and Ors. – Respondents
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 695 Of 2023
Decided On : 16-10-2023
Panchayat Bhawan - Construction Dispute - Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Section 50, First Schedule - The court discussed the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, particularly Section 50 and the First Schedule, and highlighted that the State Government's decision for construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at a specific location was based on larger public interest and ground realities, considering the existing facilities in the area. The court emphasized that the Act does not mandate the State Government to construct a particular facility as per the proposal and recommendations of the Gram Panchayat and not otherwise.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants, Elected Members of the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat, opposed the construction of Panchayat Bhawan at a specific location and argued that the earlier proposed location would be more beneficial for the villagers. They contended that the State Government's methodology bypassed the will of the Elected Members and was arbitrary, illegal, and unconstitutional.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the State Government's decision for construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at the specific location was based on larger public interest and ground realities, considering the existing facilities in the area. It held that the construction already done cannot be demolished or allowed to go to waste, and no interference is permissible in the administrative matters while exercising powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Issues: The issues involved the methodology of the State Government in bypassing the will of the Elected Members, the legality and constitutionality of the decision, and the interpretation of the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the larger public interest and ground realities, emphasizing that the Act does not mandate the State Government to construct a particular facility as per the proposal and recommendations of the Gram Panchayat and not otherwise.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed as the court found that the State Government's decision for construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at the specific location was not based on any irrelevant consideration and major chunk of the villagers would be benefited by the decision.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellants-petitioners was dismissed.
3. Briefly, the facts noted in the present appeal are that the appellants are the Elected Members of the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat, Sindhiyon ki Dhani, Tehsil Tinwari, district Jodhpur. A proposal dated 11.08.2020 was sent by the Tehsildar, Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari and to this effect a recommendation was also made by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari on 15.12.2020 with regard to construction of Panchayat Bhawan in Khasra No.336/5, Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari. Opposing such proposal and recommendation for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5, the appellants pray that the earlier proposal for construction of Panchayat Bhawan over the land bearing Khasra Nos. 347 and 401, Sindhiyon ki Dhani, Tehsil Tinwari should have been implemented on the ground that the location of Panchayat Bhawan in Khasra Nos.347 and 401 is more conducive and beneficial for the larger interests of the villagers. The construction of Panchayat Bhawan has already been undertaken and completed in Khasra No.336/5.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the methodology adopted by the State Government bypassing the Will of the Elected Members is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently submitted that the welfare activities of construction etc. in the Gram Panchayat are required to be undertaken in pursuance of the proposal sent by the Elected Members and any action de hors such proposal, will be violative of the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. Learned counsel for the appellants relying upon Section 50 read with First Schedule of the Act of 1994 submits that the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan should have been undertaken on the Khasra Nos. 347 and 401 in consonance with the proposal of the Gram Panchayat.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the learned Single Judge has not considered the matter in its correct perspective and therefore, has wrongly rejected the writ petition preferred by the appellants/petitioners.
7. We have considered the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the relevant record and provisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants.
8. It is true that normally the proposals and recommendations sent by the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat for construction of public utility building should be favorably considered by State Government while giving the sanctions, permission and funds, at the same time the State Government had to consider the Larger Public Interest of the inhabitants of the area in question. Therefore, it cannot be held that every proposal sent by Gram Sabha or Gram Panchayat should be mandatorily agreed by the State Government. In the present case, the competent authorities of the respondents have duly examined the matter as well as the proposals received from the concerned Gram Panchayat and after due diligence, a decision has been taken for construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5 Sindhiyon ki Dhani, Tehsil Tinwari, in the larger public interest.
9. In the present case, we are in complete agreement with the finding recorded by learned Single Judge which reads as under :-
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State Government's decision for construction of public utility buildings is not mandatorily bound by the proposals and recommendations of ....
Judicial intervention in administrative decisions regarding public utility construction is restricted to instances of legal violations or malafides.
Judicial review of administrative decisions related to the construction of public utility buildings is limited to cases of flagrant violation of law/rules or malafides.
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 decision on construction sites by governmental authorities is a policy matter, not open to judicial review unless mala fides are present.
The selection of the site for the construction of a Panchayat Sarkar Bhavan is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Gram Panchayat and the State Government, and the court will not intervene in suc....
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.