Hon’ble Amitava Lala, J.—Petitioners made this writ petition in the form of a Public Interest Litigation (sometimes called as PIL) praying inter alia as follows :

“I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus/prohibition thereby prohibiting the construction of the proposed ‘Haj House’ over the land of Khasra 1399 (area 4.535 acre) at village Arthala, situated at the bank (‘doob kshetra’) of river Hindon, near the National Highway No. 58-E in pargana Loni, tehsil and district Ghaziabad.

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to immediately stop , the construction of the proposed ‘Haj House’ over the land of Khasra 1399 (area 4.535 acre) at village Arthala, situated at the bank (‘doob kshetra’) of river Hindon, near the National Highway No. 58-E in pargana Loni, tehsil and district Ghaziabad.

III. Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Court may deem fit and proper.

IV. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.”

2. Mr. V.K.S. Chaudhary, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of the petitioners, contended that the State of Uttar Pradesh has leased out a land to the Haj Samiti, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow for a period of 30 years in November, 2004 by the side of river Hindon at Ghaziabad, which is “doob kshetra” belonging to the irrigation department. Subsequently, Haj Samiti has taken the possession in February, 2005. On 30th March, 2005 the Chief Minister of the State of U.P. laid down the foundation stone of the proposed structure of Haj House on the said land. According to the petitioners, in the inaugural speech the Chief Minister said that the construction will be made by September, 2005 and the inauguration will be made on the eve of the Gandhi Jayanti on 1st October, 2005. According to him, the Chief Minister announced grant of Rs. 2 Crores for construction of Haj House. He relied upon the certain paper cuttings of the daily newspapers, etc. and said that the State should not misuse the public exchequer. Secondly, construction of such Haj House will interfere with the construction of National Highway under the National Highway Authority of India. Thirdly, it will interfere with the Gas pipeline of the Gas Authority of India Limited. Fourthly, it will interfere with the Air Force activities. Lastly, making of Haj House at the site will destroy the communal harmony.

2-A. Mr. S.M.A. Kazmi, learned Chief Standing Counsel (now Advocate General) contended that writ petition is not maintainable because the petitioners have no locus standi to make the writ petition. The petitioner No. 1 is not at all a registered organisation. The deponent, who is respondent No. 3 herein, has filed the affidavit in support of the writ petition describing himself as General Secretary of the organisation. One Mahesh Kumar Ahuja, although not made party petitioner herein, is playing the role behind the screen. If this Court sees newspaper cuttings annexed with the public interest litigation, which normally the Court does not look in other litigations, name of Sri Mahesh Kumar Ahuja will be available. He has been shown as office bearer of the petitioner No. 1. Such Sri Mahesh Kumar Ahuja was or still is plaintiff to a suit, being numbered as Suit No. 472 of 2001 (Mahesh Kumar Ahuja and another v. Collector, Ghaziabad and others), which was instituted on the self same cause of action. An application for injunction was made therein, which was rejected by the civil Court. Petitioners suppressed the material fact and filed this public interest litigation. Even during the pendency of the writ petition, in the name of one Sanjeev Tyagi a similar writ petition was filed before the Supreme Court which was dismissed in limine on 25th November, 2005.

3. The prayers as made in the suit, being Suit No. 472 of 2005, are as follows :

“(a) that judgment and decree be passed in favour of plaintiffs, permanently restraining the defendants from constructing and laying foundation