RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vijay Bishnoi, J.
Swaroopa Ram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 10571 of 2021
Decided On : 11-08-2021
Writ - Panchayat Bhawan Construction - Act Section List - The court discussed the legality of land allotment for construction, emphasizing that administrative decisions by authorities are not subject to judicial interference unless malafide or legal violations are demonstrated.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the allotment of land Khasra No. 336 for constructing a Gram Panchayat Bhawan, arguing that Khasra No. 376/239 was more suitable and that the allotment was illegal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no evidence of malafide intent or legal violations in the allotment process, thus dismissing the petition.
Issues: Whether the allotment of Khasra No. 336 for the Gram Panchayat Bhawan was illegal and if the court should intervene in the administrative decision.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that administrative decisions regarding land allotment are not subject to judicial review unless there is clear evidence of malafide actions or legal breaches.
Result: The writ petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Bishnoi, J. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
2. It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition, call for the record and :-
ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be restrained to raise further construction at the said proposed land i.e. Khasra No. 336 for construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan and status quo in this regard, may kindly be ordered to be maintained.
iii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to build the Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra no. 376/239 which was eariler allotted vide order dated 02.09.2020 for the construction of Panchayat Bhawan.
iv) Without prejudice from above prayer, by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed that a lot the new land nearest and suitable place of the all villages of the Gram Panchayat, Laxmipura.
v) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.
vi) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier, the land of Khasra No.376/239 was earmarked for the purpose of construction of Panchayat Bhawan, however later on, the Gram Panchayat Laxmipur, Panchayat Samiti Shiv had passed a resolution and requested the authorities concerned to allot land of Khasra No.336 for the purpose of construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan and the authorities concerned, considering the request of the Gram Panchayat, had allotted 2.10 bighas of Khasra No.336 for the construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan, where the Gram Panchayat is now raising construction.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the land of Khasra No.336 is not appropriate for the purpose of construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan, whereas land of Khasra No.376/239 is the most appropriate land for the said construction. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the authorities concerned without taking into consideration the above fact has illegally allotted 2.10 bighas of land of Khasra No.336, hence, the said allotment is liable to be cancelled.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the material on record.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in J.R. Raghupathy Vs. State of A.P., (1988) 4 SCC 364 has observed as under:-
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.
The petitioner must demonstrate malafide or violation of law to challenge the allotment of land for construction.
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 importance of Gram Sabha resolutions for construction decisions and the non-statutory nature of guidelines issued by the State Government.
Judicial review of administrative decisions is limited to instances of legal violations or malafide actions, reaffirming the authority of government functionaries in public utility matters.
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 decision on construction sites by governmental authorities is a policy matter, not open to judicial review unless mala fides are present.
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.