Back
2016 Supreme(HP) 1715
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mansoor Ahmad Mir and Sandeep Sharma, JJ.
Mohan Dutt & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Others – Respondents
CWP No. 1307 of 2016
Decided On : 22-09-2016
For the Petitioners: Mr. Varun Thakur.
For the Respondents: Mr. Arvind Sharma, Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Mr. Rupinder Singh, Mr. Anup Rattan, Mr. Romesh Verma & Mr. Varun Chandel, Mr. Kush Sharma.
Headnote:
PIL - CONSTRUCTION OF GOVERNMENT DEGREE COLLEGE - SELECTION OF SITE - PUBLIC INTEREST - LOCUS STANDI - GUIDELINES - JUDICIAL REVIEW - POLICY DECISION - ARBITRARINESS - UNREASONABLENESS - WRIT OF MANDAMUS - WRIT OF CERTIORARI - WRIT OF PROHIBITION - PUBLIC MONEY - PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION - ABUSE OF PROCESS - FRIVOLOUS PETITION - VEXATIOUS PETITION - MALA FIDE INTENTION - VESTED INTEREST - PUBLICITY SEEKING - JUDICIAL RESTRAINT - SEPARATION OF POWERS - DOCTRINE OF PROPORTIONALITY - DOCTRINE OF LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION - DOCTRINE OF PROMISE ESTOPPEL - DOCTRINE OF UNJUST ENRICHMENT - DOCTRINE OF WAIVER - DOCTRINE OF LACHES - DOCTRINE OF ACQUIESCENCE - DOCTRINE OF ESTOPPEL - DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA - DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENT - DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS - DOCTRINE OF THE LAW OF THE CASE - DOCTRINE OF ABUSE OF PROCESS - DOCTRINE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS - DOCTRINE OF LIS PENDENS - DOCTRINE OF SUB JUDICE - DOCTRINE OF RES SUB JUDICE - DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL IMMUNITY - DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY - DOCTRINE OF ACT OF STATE - DOCTRINE OF STATE SECRETS - DOCTRINE OF OFFICIAL SECRETS - DOCTRINE OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE - DOCTRINE OF PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE - DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL NOTICE - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF LEGALITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF FACT - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF LAW - DOCTRINE OF BURDEN OF PROOF - DOCTRINE OF STANDARD OF PROOF - DOCTRINE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION - DOCTRINE OF REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION - DOCTRINE OF UNDUE HARDSHIP - DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY - DOCTRINE OF IMPOSSIBILITY - DOCTRINE OF FRUSTRATION OF CONTRACT - DOCTRINE OF MISTAKE - DOCTRINE OF UNCONSCIONABILITY - DOCTRINE OF DURESS - DOCTRINE OF UNDUE INFLUENCE - DOCTRINE OF FRAUD - DOCTRINE OF MISREPRESENTATION - DOCTRINE OF ESTOPPEL - DOCTRINE OF WAIVER - DOCTRINE OF LACHES - DOCTRINE OF ACQUIESCENCE - DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA - DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENT - DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS - DOCTRINE OF THE LAW OF THE CASE - DOCTRINE OF ABUSE OF PROCESS - DOCTRINE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS - DOCTRINE OF LIS PENDENS - DOCTRINE OF SUB JUDICE - DOCTRINE OF RES SUB JUDICE - DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL IMMUNITY - DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY - DOCTRINE OF ACT OF STATE - DOCTRINE OF STATE SECRETS - DOCTRINE OF OFFICIAL SECRETS - DOCTRINE OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE - DOCTRINE OF PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE - DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL NOTICE - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF LEGALITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF FACT - DOCTRINE OF PRESUMPTION OF LAW - DOCTRINE OF BURDEN OF PROOF - DOCTRINE OF STANDARD OF PROOF - DOCTRINE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION - DOCTRINE OF REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION - DOCTRINE OF UNDUE HARDSHIP - DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY - DOCTRINE OF IMPOSSIBILITY - DOCTRINE OF FRUSTRATION OF CONTRACT - DOCTRINE OF MISTAKE - DOCTRINE OF UNCONSCIONABILITY - DOCTRINE OF DURESS - DOCTRINE OF UNDUE INFLUENCE - DOCTRINE OF FRAUD - DOCTRINE OF MISREPRESENTATION
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners filed a PIL challenging the decision of the State Government to construct a Government Degree College at village Tikker, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, on the ground that the site was not suitable and that the decision was taken arbitrarily and without following the guidelines issued by the State Government. The petitioners also alleged that the construction of the college would be a waste of public money.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the State Government had taken the decision to construct the college at village Tikker after considering all relevant factors, including the suitability of the site and the guidelines issued by the State Government. The Court also found that the petitioners had not been able to show that the decision was taken arbitrarily or that it would be a waste of public money. The Court further found that the petitioners did not have the locus standi to file the PIL as they had not been able to show that they had suffered any personal injury or that they had any special interest in the matter.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners had the locus standi to file the PIL. 2. Whether the decision of the State Government to construct the college at village Tikker was arbitrary or unreasonable. 3. Whether the construction of the college would be a waste of public money.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioners did not have the locus standi to file the PIL as they had not been able to show that they had suffered any personal injury or that they had any special interest in the matter. 2. The Court held that the decision of the State Government to construct the college at village Tikker was not arbitrary or unreasonable as it had been taken after considering all relevant factors, including the suitability of the site and the guidelines issued by the State Government. 3. The Court held that the construction of the college would not be a waste of public money as it would provide much-needed educational facilities to the people of the area.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the PIL.
Sandeep Sharma, J.
By way of present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for following main reliefs:-
“a) That a writ of certiorari may kindly be issued quashing and setting aside the decision of the respondent State Government to select the site of Modern Degree College, Sarahan at Village Tikker, out of land comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 30/42, plots 20, measuring 464.10 Bighas situated in Mohal Tikker, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur (H.P.) as per copy of Jamabandi for the year 2013-14.
b) That the writ of mandamus may be issued against the respondent State Government not to carry out any type of construction work at village Tikker for the construction of Govt. Modern Degree College, Sarahan including the construction of link road to the site.
c) That necessary directions may be issued against the respondents No. 2, 3, 5 to 7 directing them to select/approve or to examine the feasibility of land for the construction of Govt. Modern College, Sarahan at the following villages, which are situated near and around Sarahan, as per the latest Guidelines of the respondent State Government annexed at Annexure P-9:-
i) Bag-Pashog/Kawagdhar,
ii) Between village Bhellan & Nawal-Labhan,
iii) Barasra
iv) Kahan (New Site)
Or any other suitable place near to Sarahan, so that sufficient land is available as per requirement for the construction of Govt. Modern College, for the convenience of general public of Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur (H.P.)
d) That the Writ of mandamus may be issued against the respondent State Govt. to take suitable action with the respondent No. 1 for obtaining no objection with regard to the land situated at village Kahan near to Petrol Pump which site was earlier selected for the construction of College.
2. Present petition has been filed as Public Interest Litigation (in short ‘PIL’) by petitioners specifically laying challenge to the decision of the respondents-State, wherein, it was decided to establish Govt. Degree College, Sarahan at village Tikker on the land comprised Khata Khatauni No. 30/42, plots 20, measuring 464.10 Bighas situated in Mohal Tikker, Hadbast No. 260, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur (H.P.)
3. Perusal of pleadings available on record suggests that earlier respondents-State had decided to construct Govt. Degree College at village Kahan, and the then Chief Minister, Himachal Pradesh had also laid foundation stone. Since, respondents-State changed its earlier decision of setting up Govt. Degree College at village Kahan, present petitioners filed writ petition in the shape of public interest litigation before this Court praying therein issuance of writ of mandamus against respondents-State not to construct Govt. Degree College, Sarahan at village Tikker. Petitioners also sought directions to the respondents-State to select/approve or to examine the feasibility of land for construction of aforesaid College at the villages which are situated near and around Sarahan, strictly in terms of Guidelines issued by respondents-State, so that College is constructed on sufficient land.
4. Close scrutiny of the pleadings on record suggests that earlier respondents-State had selected site for Govt. Degree College at village Kahan on the National Highway towards Nahan i.e. 1 kilometer from Sarahan. But, thereafter, respondents-State vide Notification dated 14.01.2014 decided to open nine (9) Government Colleges in different places in the State of Himachal Pradesh including Government Degree College, Sarahan, District Sirmaur at village Tikker. It also emerges from the record that some of the owners of the land, gifted 20 bighas of land comprising Khata Khatauni No. 30/42, plots 20, measuring 464.10 bighas situated in revenue village Tikker, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur (H.P.) as per the copy of jamabandi for the year 2013-14. On the basis of aforesaid gift deeds executed by the owners of the land of village Tikker, mutations No. 279 to 287 were
