The Governing Body of the Auroville Foundation can conduct land exchanges without prior government approval, provided it adheres to the Auroville Master Plan and consults necessary committees.

ORDER :

1. W.P.No.8639 of 2024 has been filed seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the first respondent from proceeding with any transaction of land transfer, including land exchanges, without following the procedure laid down in the Auroville Foundation Rules 1997 (for short, the 1997 Rules) and the General Financial Rules 2017 (for brevity, the 2017 Rules).

2. W.P.No.8652 of 2024 has been filed seeking for a direction to the second respondent to cancel the relevant entries made from the year 2021 whenever the land exchanges were registered and entered in the encumbrance register without following the relevant Rules.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent, in both the writ petitions.

4. The facts leading to filing of these cases are as follows :

(i) The petitioner claims to be a Member of the 'Residents' Assembly" that forms part of one of the three Authorities of the Auroville Foundation (hereinafter called the Foundation). Under Rule 4(1)(d) of the 1997 Rules, it is mandatory for the Governing Body of the Foundation to consult (i) the Working Committee and (ii) the Funds and the Assets Management Committee (FAMC) of the Residents' Assembly to acquire by purchase, gift, lease or otherwise any immovable property, which may be necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Foundation.

(ii) Similarly, as per Rule 4(1)(i) of the 1997 Rules, it is mandatory for the Governing Body to dispose of the immovable property through transfer, sale or otherwise only in consultation with the Working Committee and the FAMC. That apart, no property, which is worth more than Rs.5 lakhs, can be sold without the sanction of the Government of India (GoI). Even under Rule 309 of the 2017 Rules, no land belonging to the Government or any of its bodies including autonomous bodies, etc., can be sold without the previous sanction of the Government.

(iii) The grievance of the petitioner is that from the year 2021, several lands of the Foundation have been exchanged with third parties without following any of the Rules and without the knowledge and consultation of the Working Committee and the FAMC and also without following due diligence procedure. That apart, the land exchanges were undertaken without obtaining the prior sanction of the GoI.

(iv) According to the petitioner, several extent of lands belonging to the Foundation has been exchanged in an illegal manner and it is under these circumstances, the above writ petitions have been filed before this Court.

5. The first respondent has filed a common counter affidavit wherein they have questioned the maintainability of these writ petitions on the ground that the petitioner has no locus standi to question the authority of the first respondent only on the basis that she is a Member of the Residents' Assembly. The first respondent has explained the various land exchanges that took place from 2021 to 2024 and stated that such exchanges were warranted for the formation of the Crown Road and consolidation of lands as per the vision laid out by the Mother's Charter. The first respondent has also explained the manner, in which, the consultation took place with the Working Committee of the Residents' Assembly and the FAMC. The first respondent has also justified the land exchange as a method of acquiring land within the Master Plan Area. That apart, the GoI has also provided a check list through its communication dated 06.11.2023 and this check slip was strictly followed.

6. The first respondent has taken a stand that the Foundation has received 240 acres more than its exchange for value of nearly 70 lakhs more than the value of the land provided. In so far as the sanction from the GoI is concerned, it has been stated that letters were written to the Government for permission and the Ministry of Education issued an Office Memo