Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J
Thakur Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for the parties submit that for the construction of Panchayat Bhawan for Gram Panchayat, Annapurna, the land of Khasra No.660/510 is more appropriate, whereas the rival contentions have been raised that the land of Khasra No.699/518 is more conducive. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the matter may be sent to the District Collector, Balotra where the rival contentions will be raised on behalf of the parties and the District Collector, Balotra may be directed to take decision that over which land (Khasra No.699/518 or Khasra No. 660/510) the construction of Panchayat Bhawan is more beneficial for the people of that area by passing a speaking order.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that if such representations are filed, the same shall be decided by District Collector, Balotra and a decision for the welfare of the large number of people of that area will be taken by taking into consideration the more suitable place for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan.
4. In view of the submissions made before this Court, the present writ petitions are disposed of with a lib
The court directed the District Collector to decide on the suitable land for the Panchayat Bhawan, emphasizing the need for a reasoned decision in the interest of the community.
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 State Government has exclusive jurisdiction over the site selection for Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, and judicial interference is unwarranted.
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 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 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.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
