IMPORTANT POINT
A public interest litigation cannot be used by a petitioner who previously supported the actions being challenged, as it constitutes an abuse of the judicial process.

ORDER :

Kuldeep Mathur, J.

This petition styled as Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioner who is a Municipal Councilor of Municipal Council Nathdwara praying for the following reliefs:-

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that record of the case may kindly be called for and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:-

i. the allotment so sought to be made in favour of the private body-Tatpadam Upvan Private Limited (respondent No.4) in Khasra No.165 of village Nathuwas and Khasras No.492, 645 and 646 of village Upli Odan for construction of an Amusement Park; and allotment sought to be made in favour of Miraj Developers Limited (respondent No.5) in Khasras No.492, 646, 647 and 648 of revenue village Upli Odan, situated on 120’ road in lieu of amount spent by the said Company for construction of Iconic Gate in Nathdwara may kindly be quashed and set aside;

ii. the respondent/State may be further directed to initiate proper enquiry against the local body and to take appropriate action against the erring officials;

iii. that all the proceedings drawn in favour of the respondents No.4 and 5 may kindly be quashed and set aside;

iv. any other appropriate relief (s) which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be passed in favour of the petitioner;

VI. writ petition of the petitioner be allowed with costs.”

2. Drawing attention of the Court towards the facts as pleaded in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that in conformity with the provisions of the Rajasthan Muncipalities Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘the Act of 2009’), the respondent no.5 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Municipal Council, Nathdwara for construction of an Iconic Gate and Model Bus Stand in the city of Nathdwara and in lieu of the amount spent for construction of the aforesaid projects, a piece of land bearing Khasra nos.492, 646, 647 and 648 situated at 120’ road in Revenue Village Upli Odan has been allotted. Learned counsel further urged that the respondent no.4 being a company owned by the Miraj Group was allotted land ad measuring 25 Bighas comprised in Khasra no.165 of Village Nathuwas and Khasra nos.492, 645 and 646 of Village Upli Odan for construction of the biggest Idol of Lord Shiva and an Amusement Park. Though initially, lands in Khasra Nos.3218/490 and 3218/492 were proposed to be allotted.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that Municipal Council, Nathdwara vide resolutions dated 19.06.2020 and 06.07.2020 had accepted the proposal submitted by the respondent no.4 for the purpose of allotment of 25 Bighas of land at the concessional price i.e. 10% of the reserved price, on which an Idol of Lord Shiva is being constructed, which is in gross violation of ‘Land Allotment Policy – 2015’ which prescribes and provides for the procedure for allotment of public land and the eventualities in which, public land can be allotted at a concessional price. Learned counsel vehemently submitted that till date, no order for allotment of land has been issued in favour of the private respondents but the construction of Shiv Murti/Statue and Recreational Park and the Large Public Park/Amusement Park has already been completed. It was thus prayed that the order of allotment of above mentioned lands made in favour of private respondents be quashed and set aside.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently submitted that the petitioner has no locus whatsoever to file the present petition in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation. Learned counsel forcefully contended that in the event of acceptance of the prayers made in the present writ petition, the same would not only cause great damage to the development work in Nathdwara city but would also adversely affect the tourism, recreational and socio-cultural activities in the city of Nathdwara.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents further contended that the prese