Bombay High Court
Indian Insti. Of Architects, Navi ... vs The City And Industrial Developement ... on 1 July, 2024
Author: G. S. Kulkarni
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni
2024:BHC-AS:25678-DB
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Vidya /psv/pvr
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 28 OF 2019
Indian Institute of Architects ... Petitioner
Navi Mumbai Center
Through its Chairman, Shekhar Bagool and
Jt. Secretary Kaushal Jadia
Versus
1. The City & Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.
Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021.
2. State of Maharshtra, through Chief Secretary
Urban Development Department, Mumbai-400032.
3. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation,
Head office, Sector - 15A, CBD Belapur,
Navi Mumbai - 400 614.
4. Divisional Commissioner,
1st floor, Konkan Division, Konkan Bhavan
CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai.
5. M/s. Progressive Homes,
707, 'Devavrata', 7th floor, Plot No. 83,
Sector-17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400 705
Through their Partners
(i) Vinod Dahyalal Trivedi
(ii) Devang Vinod Trivedi
(iii) Jigar Vinod Trivedi
6. The Additional Chief Secretary,
Ministry of School Education and Sports,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
7. Director of Sports,
Govt. of Maharashtra, Sports Complex,
Balewadi, Pune.
Page 1 of 134
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
8. Pradip Sampatrao Indulkar
1, Sagar Darshan CHS,
Juhu-Versova Link Road,
Four Bungalow, Andheri (W)
Mumbai - 400 053. ...Respondents
Mr. Indrajeet Kulkarni for Petitioner/Applicant.
Mr. Nitin V. Gangal with Mr. Ashok D. Kadam with Ms. Prerna Shukla for
Respondent No.1/CIDCO.
Mr. Y. S. Jahagirdar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Girish S. Godbole, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal and Mr.Shamim Shaikh, for
Respondent No.5.
Mr. B. V. Samant, Addl. Govt. Pleader with Mr. A. A. Alaspukar, AGP for
State/Respondent Nos.2, 4, 6 and 7.
Mr. Tejesh Dande with Mr. Bharat Gadhavi for Respondent No.3/ NMMC.
Ms. Nilima Sanglikar, for Respondent No.8.
Table of Contents
Paragraph Nos. Page Nos.
A Prelude 1-8 3-8
B Facts 9 - 23 8 - 20
C Pleadings: Reply & Rejoinder Affidavits 24 - 45 20-48
D Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner 46-48 48 - 51
E Submission on behalf of Respondent No.8 49 51 - 54
F Submissions on behalf of Respondent No.5 50 55 - 56
G Submissions on behalf of NMMC 51 56 - 57
H Submissions on behalf of CIDCO 52-54 57 - 60
I Submissions on behalf of State Government 55 - 57 60 - 61
J Reasons and Conclusions 58-117 61 - 134
K Relevant decisions of the Supreme Court 108 - 113 124 -131
Materials and judgments on sports
__________
_______________________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
RESERVED ON: 19 OCTOBER, 2023
PRONOUNCED ON: 01 JULY, 2024
_______________________
Page 2 of 134
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
JUDGMENT (Per G. S. Kulkarni, J.)
(A) Prelude
1. As to whether vacant land earmarked from the year 2003 for a
'Government Sports Complex' at Navi Mumbai, should be sacrificed for
concretization and commercial exploitation, is the issue raised in the
present Public Interest Litigation.
2. The Indian Institute of Architects, Navi Mumbai Center, is before
the Court in this public interest litigation, inter alia assailing the actions of
respondent No.1 - City Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (for
short 'CIDCO') and of the State of Maharashtra through its Sports
Department and the Urban Development Department.
3. The subject matter of controversy is land admeasuring about 20
acres situated at Sector 12 and 13 ("land") at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai,
which has been earmarked since 2003 by the CIDCO to be utilized for
setting up a Government Sports Complex, of an international standard as
per the sports policy/decision of the Government of Maharashtra under
the Government Resolution dated 26 March 2003. CIDCO was
constituted as a New Town Development Authority for New Bombay
(now the Navi Mumbai) region by the State Government in the year 1971.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
It is contended by the petitioner that with appropriate foresight and in
recognition to the importance "sports" in the contemporary times would
internationally wield, about 61 acres of land in sector 12 and 13 was
earmarked for a contiguous sports complex, namely, for a "Government
Sports Complex" on land admeasuring 20 acres and a Sports Complex to
be set up by the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (for short
"NMMC") on the remaining 41 acres of land.
4. The case of the petitioner is that a dent was caused to such
demarcation when the same was sought to be taken away when CIDCO
floated a tender in August 2016 inviting bids to allot a part of the land
demarcated as plot Nos. 1, 2 and 4 for residential purpose and plot no. 5
for residential and commercial use. In such tender, none other than
respondent No. 5's participation was accepted, who came to be allotted
plot no. 4 which was part of the land proposed to be developed as a
Government Sports Complex.
5. The case of the petitioner is also that after filing of the petition,
there were subsequent developments, to the effect that the Government
which had intended to develop the said land at Ghansoli for Government
Sports Complex, has now ostensibly proposed to set up such complex at a
far off place in a rural area namely at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon,
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
District Raigad, which is more than 115 kilometers away from the existing
site at Ghansoli (Navi Mumbai). The petitioner contends that such place
lacks the basic necessary infrastructure much less internationally accepted
for a sports complex. It is hence contended by the petitioner that it is
unthinkable that such decision could be taken by the State Government.
This decision of the State Government, which is of a recent origin, is also
challenged by the petitioner. As on date, out of 41 acres of land earmarked
for NMMC, 36 acres of land has been handed over to the NMMC by
CIDCO to develop its sports complex. However, the land earmarked for
the contiguous government sports complex as proposed in the year 2003
is being illegally taken away to be shifted to far off place in the rural area, is
the case of the petitioner. On such backdrop, respondent No.5 who has
been allotted a part of the land earmarked for the government sports
complex is asserting to develop the land as allotted to it by CIDCO.
Respondent No.5 has also taken a stand that it is ready for realignment of
the allotted plot so as to make a way for the Government of Maharashtra
Sports Complex. Such is the complexion of the proceedings before us.
6. During the pendency of the petition, the Additional Chief Secretary,
Ministry of School Education and Sports, Government of Maharashtra and
the Director of Sports, Government of Maharashtra, were permitted to be
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
impleaded as parties. Further, a private respondent, namely, respondent
No. 8 who has supported the petitioner's cause, was also permitted to be
impleaded as a party to the present proceedings.
7. As the petitioner has referred to paragraph (1) of the petition in
prayer clause (1) of the petition, we note the contents of such paragraph,
which has a bearing on the reliefs as prayed for, which also reflect the
grievance of the petitioner, to which briefly we have adverted hereinabove.
Paragraph 1 of the Writ Petition reads thus:-
"1. Subject matter in brief:
The present petition is filed for directions to the respondent nos.1
& 2.
I) To reinstate entire plot of land (admeasuring about 43.00
acres which also includes about 23.00 acres extension of sports
complex as per NMMC's General Body Resolution held in
September 2013, situated at Sector 12 & 12A Ghansoli, Navi
Mumbai that was earmarked for Regional Sports Complex of
International Standards as envisaged by Govt. of Maharashtra
vide their G.R. dt. 26th March 2003, as explained/detailed below.
a) To cancel the sub-division and change of use made by
CIDCO illegally (viz. Plot No.04- Residential use & Plot No.05
for C+R use), on the sports complex plot earmarked for NMMC
admeasuring about 5.00 acres, in Sector-12 and reinstate the said
plot to original use viz. sports complex for NMMC. General body
of NMMC has also earlier resolved in September 2013 to reserve
the said plot for extension of sports complex.
b) To cancel the relocated allotment of tender Plot No.04,
which is illegally shifted by CIDCO within plot earmarked for
Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex abutting Palm
Beach Road and to reinstate the use, back to sports complex for
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government of Maharashtra, admeasuring totally about 20.22
acres, as earmarked earlier.
c) To cancel the illegal sub-division of plot (viz. No. 1 & 2)
admeasuring about 5.00 acres in Sector- 12, and allot to NMMC
the same, along with the area of about 18 acres located in Sector
12- A, as per NMMC General Body resolution passed way back
in September 2013.
d) To restrain CIDCO from further subdividing of plots
earmarked for NMMC sports complex plot and Govt. of
Maharashtra sports complex plot in Sector- 12, Ghansoli and also
in adjoining Sector- 12A.
e) To set aside the Land pricing policy framed by CIDCO in
2007 for social facility plots and randomly approved by Govt. Of
Maharashtra subsequently, surpassing the earlier GR of 6 th
January 1994 and Sports GR dated 24th February 2003.
II) By virtue of Government of Maharashtra Notification
dated 15 December 1994 and 29 July 2008, respondent No.3
becoming the full fledged planning authority, to restrain
Respondent No.1, CIDCO perpetually as a planning authority in
areas under NMMC jurisdiction to enable Respondent No.3,
NMMC to be/act as the planning authority in totality."
8. It may be noted that during the course of hearing and as recorded
by the Court in its order dated 18 July 2023, on behalf of the petitioner a
statement was made that only the following prayers as made in the writ
petition are being pressed by the petitioner:
"10.1 This Hon'ble Court by an appropriate order may kindly
direct Respondent nos.1 & 2 to reinstate the entire plot of land, as
detailed viz, as per 1) I, a, b, c, d, e and II.
10.2 Any other and further relief as in the nature and
circumstances of the case deems fit, may kindly be granted.
10.3 This Hon'ble Court by an order may kindly direct the
Respondent no.2, the State Government, to set aside two
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
impugned G.R's dated 26th March 2021 and 14th June 2021 which
are at "Exhibit-"U" and "Exhibit-"V" respectively.
10.6 The allotment of plot no. 4 (within plot no. 3) to
respondent no. 5 also be quashed and set aside the same being
illegal, in contravention Reg. 4(i) of Navi Mumbai Disposal of
Land Regulations and allotted without invitation of tender to a
private party, when the land is designated for public purpose of
Govt. Sports Complex and the plots be restored to their state with
restoration of the location and numbering.
10.10 A Committee under Chairmanship of Chief Secretary
along with Secretary of School Education and Sports department,
Urban Development department be constituted for the
implementation of project of Sports Complex under observation of
Hon'ble High Court.
10.11 The Hon'ble Court by an order may kindly quash and set
aside the government order dated 6 September, 2021."
(B) FACTS
9. The facts in some detail can be noted: The petitioner is a national
body of Architects described to play a major role in promoting the
profession of Architecture by organizing and uniting the Architects of
India, to promote aesthetic, scientific and practical efficiency of the
profession in both practice and in education. It has inter alia formed city-
wise centres under respective State level chapters. It has a State level
chapter at Navi Mumbai.
10. The petitioner contends that in the contemporary times, globally
sports have assumed an important role in the development of nations,
hence, it is of utmost necessity that sports complexes are created, which are
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
available to be used by all the citizens. Such complexes can also be used
for recreational activities and for other uses like for music concerts, laser
shows, entertainment, various types of sports academies, and other similar
activities. It is contended that this would also add to the creation of
international cities in which sports is a subject of substantial concern and
importance by the Government, in the interest of overall development of
the country. It is hence, the duty of the State to have proper infrastructure
for sports activities, is the case of the petitioner. It is contended that the
sports complex of international standards can also be used for various
national and international events like the Asian games, Commonwealth
games, National & State level games as also for Mini Olympics, etc.
11. In the year 1992, NMMC came to be constituted as a municipal
corporation for Navi Mumbai, under the Bombay (now Maharashtra)
Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. The NMMC was to be the
second planning authority for different nodes (areas) of Navi Mumbai. It
is contended that prior to the formation of NMMC, CIDCO was the only
planning authority for the various nodes viz; Vashi, Koparkhairane,
Ghansoli, Airoli, Sanpada, Nerul and Belapur. It is stated that on its
constitution, NMMC became the planning authority for 44 villages
including the areas vested with CIDCO. The petitioner has contended
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
that as set out in Government's order dated 6 January 1994 (Exhibit A) all
lands/plots earmarked or reserved for public purposes under the
development plan for New Bombay prepared by CIDCO, were to be
transferred to NMMC by CIDCO. It is stated that operationally NMMC
became the planning authority for Navi Mumbai area (except Ghansoli)
vide Government order dated 15 December 1994 (Exhibit B) and
subsequently, it is stated to have assumed authority as the planning
authority for Ghansoli node vide Government order dated 29 July 2008
(Exhibit C). It is stated that NMMC being a planning authority, it had
obligations to provide for civic services for which it needed land / plots
which could be earmarked for public purposes, this apart from the lands
which were earlier earmarked by CIDCO to be used for public purposes in
the development plan prepared by the CIDCO.
12. It is the petitioner's case that much prior to the NMMC being
constituted as the planning authority for Ghansoli city, the State
Government under Government Resolution dated 24 February 2003 had
resolved that a Regional Sports Complex be established and developed in
each revenue Region, a "Taluka sports complex" at Taluka level, and a
"District Sports Complex" at District level. It was also resolved that for
building such sports complexes, Government lands or the lands belonging
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
to local governments be earmarked for sports complexes and the same
should be handed over, for the development of sports complex, free of
occupancy price and free of revenue, to the respective authorities.
13. The petitioner contends that in pursuance of such sports policy, the
State Government issued a specific Government Resolution dated 26
March 2003, whereunder one Regional Sports Complex of international
standard with all necessary facilities for each of the Revenue Region was to
be provided in Thane / Navi Mumbai. Such Government Resolution also
set out various financial facilities which would be provided in such sport
complexes. It is contended by the petitioner that accordingly CIDCO
earmarked about 61 acres of land in sector 12 and 13 of Ghansoli Node for
sports complex. Out of the said 61 acres, 41 acres of land was earmarked
for allotment to NMMC for its sports complex and remaining about 20
acres was earmarked for allotment to the State Government for the
Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex. It is stated that out of the
41 acres, about 36 acres have been allotted for NMMC in the year 2017
and possession of the same was also handed over. The petitioner has
contended that 20 acres of land to be utilized for the Government Sports
Complex, formed a contiguous part of the adjoining sports complex to be
set up by the NMMC, as merely 20 acres could not have accommodated
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
an international standard cricket stadium along with statutory parking and
other facilities.
14. It is stated by the petitioner that such land being earmarked for the
sports complexes was apparent from the departmental notes and the inter-
office correspondence dated 22 June 2007 (Exhibit G). It is contended
that area of 41 acres earmarked for NMMC Sports Complex in Sector 12
and sector 13 in Ghansoli node was reduced by the CIDCO by about 5
acres in Sector 12 without any intimation and consent of the NMMC, and
a letter of allotment dated 19 January 2017 with such reduced plot area,
was issued by CIDCO to the NMMC.
15. The petitioner has next contended that on 26 February 2007, the
State Government issued a land pricing and land disposal policy for
educational, religious, cultural and other social facilities including health
and public utilities in Navi Mumbai. Also as per the Government Sports
Policy Resolution, public facility plots to be developed were brought under
pricing and earlier regime of free vesting was deviated. The petitioner
contends that such policy was not in line with the 2003 Government
Resolution on Sports Infrastructure and in its applicability to the
Government Sports Complex qua lands which in fact would stand vested
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
with the State Government and of its ownership. It is contended that this
position was recognized in the earlier orders of the Government of
Maharashtra dated 6 January 1994. It is stated that in fact such decision of
the State Government if applicable to the Government Sports Complex,
was very much suicidal to the basic plan of developing sports complexes
including the setting up of the Konkan Regional Sports Complex at Navi
Mumbai. It is contended that such policy was issued contrary to the
provisions of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for
short 'the MRTP Act') and more particularly, contrary to Section 37
thereof, being a provision dealing with minor modification of a
development plan and the procedure to be adopted thereunder. It is
petitioner's contention that accordingly CIDCO also modified its pricing
policy vide board resolution dated 26 September 2007, which according to
the petitioner, was an illegal act on the part of the CIDCO qua its
applicability to the allotment of land for the State Government Sports
Complex.
16. The petitioner contends that NMMC re-evaluated its land
requirement qua the need for establishing regional sport complex, meeting
international standards, in comparison to similar types of sport complexes
built and in existence in the State of Maharashtra and elsewhere like Indira
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Gandhi Sports complex at New Delhi (admeasuring about 102 acres) and
Baner Sport Complex at Pune (admeasuring about 128 acres). In such
context, NMMC by its letter dated 31 July 2012 addressed to CIDCO as
also to the State Government, demanded handing over of the land
reserved for the sports complex at Sector 13 along with the plot of land
reserved for sports/cricket stadium to be developed by State of
Maharashtra at Sector 12 and 12A situated at Ghansoli node along with
the subdivided plots of lands bearing plot nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 at Sector 12
and other plots of lands which were not numbered including land at Sector
12A at Ghansoli. Such letters, according to the petitioner, deal with the
justification of requiring larger land admeasuring about 77 acres.
17. It is the petitioner's case that in September 2013 the General Body
of the NMMC in its capacity as a local self Government, passed a
resolution reserving plots on South and North side of Government of
Maharashtra Sports Complex, for extension of sports complex to provide
International Standard Integrated Regional Sports Complex. Also
objections from the public at large were invited by issuance of a public
notice in Government Gazette for such purpose, being proposal for
extension of Sport Complex and for forwarding of such proposal for minor
modification under Section 37(2) of the MRTP Act of the existing
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
development plan as earlier published by CIDCO. The grievance of the
petitioner is however that although CIDCO was also a planning authority,
it was not following the procedure under Section 37 when it intended to
modify the requirement of the earmarking of the land for sports complex
to be developed by the NMMC as also by the State Government, and that
in fact, CIDCO acted in breach of the MRTP Act. It is contended that in
these circumstances, NMMC by its letter dated 3 December 2013
addressed to the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, reiterated its
demand for 41 acres of land at Ghansoli comprising of 28.13 acres land at
Sector 12, 11.06 acres land at Sector 12A and 35.93 acres land at Sector 13,
which was adjacent / contiguous piece of land for constructing regional
sport complex of international standards.
18. It is contended that surprisingly CIDCO in August, 2006 issued a
public tender under Scheme No. MM-II/02/2016-2017 inviting bids for
lease of plots for residential and commercial use at Ghansoli, Navi
Mumbai, in terms of Annexure I and II of the said notice. Annexure I
pertained to plot Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and Annexure II pertained to plot no.5.
It is contended that both these sub-divided plots totally admeasuring
about 5 acres were part of the land earmarked for NMMC Sport Complex.
It is hence contended by the petitioner that CIDCO not only illegally
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
cancelled 5 acres plot earmarked for NMMC sports complex, but also sub-
divided and changed its use to residential and commercial purposes.
According to the petitioner, CIDCO had no authority even as a new town
development authority to make such sub-division and invite bids and
attempt to allot the land earmarked for the sport complex to private
parties. It is hence contended by the petitioner that once CIDCO was
aware that NMMC is also a planning authority for the Navi Mumbai area,
such earmarking of lands which was akin to reservation of land under the
CIDCO's development plan, hence CIDCO could not have resorted to
change the user of the land earmarked for Government Sports Complex by
inviting bids for commercial exploitation of the land, that too without an
express approval of the State Government. On such backdrop, the State
Government issued a Government Resolution dated 15 December 2017
declaring that the NMMC has intended to prepare a development plan for
the Navi Mumbai areas falling within its jurisdiction.
19. The petitioner hence contends that when for such long years under
the Government Resolution dated 15 December, 2017 when the land in
question was earmarked for the Government Sports Complex at Ghansoli,
the CIDCO had no authority to form plots and tender such plots, more
particularly plot no.4, out of the land reserved for sport complex to be
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
allotted to developers for residential and commercial complexes to be
constructed. The petitioner in such circumstances addressed a
representation dated 15 June 2018 to the Vice Chairman/Managing
Director, CIDCO requesting for reinstating the use of the "Regional Sports
Complex land" as originally envisaged and planned for such use by
cancelling allotment of plot no.4 in favour of respondent no. 3 and also
deleting three other plots, being Plot Nos.1, 2 and 5, in Sector 12 at
Ghansoli node, Navi Mumbai to be used for residential/residential-
commercial development. Such representations were also made to the
Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department being representation
dated 24 July 2018 as also to the Chief Minister and the Prime Minister on
the even date. However, as no action was taken by any of the authorities,
the present petition was filed praying for the reliefs which we have noted
hereinabove.
20. By an amendment to the petition, the petitioner has contended that
during pendency of the petition, the State Government issued a
Government Resolution dated 26 March 2021 (Exhibit "U") by which the
State Government shifted the Konkan Regional Sports Complex of
International Standard from Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai to Village Nanore,
Taluka Mangaon, Dist. Raigad. It is the petitioner's case, that incidentally
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
it is exactly 18 years prior to this Government Resolution, (i.e. on 26
March, 2003) the Government had issued a notification ordering to
establish Konkan Regional Sports Complex at Navi Mumbai, when 61
acres were earmarked/reserved by CIDCO for the two sports complexes. It
is contended that about 78 acres of land earmarked at Ghansoli, Navi
Mumbai for Regional sports complex is still vacant and available, out of
which, 61 acres was earmarked/reserved by CIDCO in the year 2003,
which includes 20 acres reserved for Government of Maharashtra Sports
Complex and 41 acres for NMMC sports complex. It is contended that
once such decision earmarking 41 acres to be allotted to NMMC was
partly implemented by allotting 36 acres of such land to NMMC, there
could be no reason as to why the State Government had not been allotted
the land earmarked by CIDCO for a government sports complex. It is also
contended that such decision to shift the complex at Village Nanore,
Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad, hence was totally illegal.
21. The petitioner has also contended that CIDCO could not have
invited bids for allotment of 2.5 acres of land from the land earmarked for
Sports Complex, for commercial and residential use and allotted the same
to respondent No.5, and this more particularly when the matter was
subjudice before this Court. It is on such premise the decision of the State
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government as contained in the Government Resolution dated 26 March
2021, is also sought to be assailed by the petitioner along with the action of
CIDCO to allot the land in favour of respondent No.5.
22. The petitioner has categorically contended that there is no logic in
24 acres of land being allotted for such sports complex at a place in a rural
area (Nanore), which is 115 km away from the present land reserved at
Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai, which according to the petitioner was
appropriate land kept reserved since the year 2003. It is contended that it
is now almost 21 years that the land is still available, and which is required
to be developed for the said purpose and more particularly with the
international airport coming up at Navi Mumbai, as also when high
density of population is available to take advantage of the sports facilities
to be made available. It is contended that the State Government cannot
protect the CIDCO as also the CIDCO cannot act against the provisions of
law in defeating the development of the sport complex at the earmarked
area at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai. It is also contended by the petitioner that
in order to make the present proceedings infructuous, the State
Government has issued a Government Resolution dated 6 September
2021 (Exhibit "W") by which the State Government has purported to
cancel the earmarking of such land by NMMC on plot of land.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
23. It is on the aforesaid premise the present petition is being pursued
by the petitioner praying for the reliefs as noted hereinabove.
(C) Pleadings: Reply and Rejoinder Affidavits
24. We now refer to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the
respondents and the rejoinder affidavit as placed on record. It needs to be
noted that the parties have filed 28 such affidavits. To discuss the case of
the respondents as pleaded from time to time and the rejoinder affidavits,
would overburden the judgment, however, an endeavour is made to
encapsulate the case of the parties in such affidavits, in the order they are
filed.
Affidavit of Respondent No.1-CIDCO
25. On behalf of respondent No.1-CIDCO a reply affidavit is filed of
Mr. Faiyaz Ahmed Khan, Manager Town Services-1, opposing the
petition. At the outset, it is stated that CIDCO is a Government Company,
share capital of which is subscribed wholly and exclusively by the
Government of Maharashtra. The affidavit sets out the background as to
how New Bombay, a twin city, was constituted so as to decongest Mumbai
and CIDCO being appointed as a New Town Development Authority for
Navi Mumbai. The affidavit makes a reference to the relevant provisions of
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
the MRTP Act conferring such authority in the CIDCO (as new town
development authority) to contend that the lands in Navi Mumbai were
"government owned", acquired for the Navi Mumbai project and vested
with the CIDCO. It is stated that unlike any other local authority within
whose territorial limits there are privately owned lands, for the area of
Navi Mumbai, entire land vested with CIDCO, the State Government
being the owner of all the lands. It is stated that considering the contents
of the sanctioned development plan prepared by CIDCO for the Navi
Mumbai, only the land use zones were demarcated and such demarcation
does not designate specific plot-wise reservations, as conventionally
undertaken for the development plans prepared by other local authorities.
It is stated that in the Nodal plan prepared by CIDCO, plots are not
"reserved" and are only earmarked for different land uses. It is stated that
the nodal plans are not like development plans, for the preparation of
which procedure under MRTP Act was not to be followed, nor was it
applicable. It is further stated that the CIDCO enjoys the flexibility to
change the land uses of particular lands/plots as per its requirement and no
specific land use was ever assigned to the plots/land in question as also
there are no statutory reservations as such contemplated under the
provisions of MRTP Act and only an earmarking of particular land use in
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
the nodal plan is provided, such earmarking being not a statutory
reservation. The affidavit refers to the powers of CIDCO as conferred
under the Navi Mumbai Disposal of Lands (Amendment) Regulations
2008 to dispose of lands. It is stated that in exercise of its powers to
dispose lands under the 2008 Regulations, the Marketing section of
CIDCO had advertised a scheme of marketing of plots by the tender in
question to allot four plots in Sector - 12, Ghansoli node, i.e., plot. Nos. 1,
2 & 4 for residential use and plot No. 5 for residential plus commercial use
in the month of August, 2016. It is stated that as per approved Social
Facility Norms for Navi Mumbai (B.R. 8899 dated 22.01.2005), a sports
complex is a city level facility, which is one for every 5 lakh population
with an area of 5 hectares. It is contended that the provisional population
of the NMMC area from Airoli to Belapur in the year 2011 was 11.20 lakhs
and was to increase to 24.36 lakhs in the year 2031. The affidavit furnishes
the details of the lands already allotted to the private parties for recreation
purpose.
26. It is next stated that taking into consideration the fact that there was
no correspondence from the Government of Maharashtra in regard to the
requirement of the said land earmarked for a Government Sports Complex
since the year 2004, a Committee of the CIDCO in its meeting held on 1
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
September 2016 took a decision to change the user of plot No. 3, Sector -
12, Ghansoli from 'Social Facility (Government of Maharashtra Sports
Complex)' to 'Future Development'. Referring to the contention of the
petitioner in regard to relocation of the Sports Complex, it is stated that
although it appears that Plot No.4 is relocated in the area earmarked for
Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex, in reality plot No. 4 is
relocated in an area earmarked for Future Development, the proposal to
relocate the plot has been accepted within the powers vested with the
CIDCO, and with due approval of Competent authority. Insofar as the
pricing of the land in question, CIDCO's affidavit inter alia states thus:-
"... ... .. The submission of the Petitioner that the said land for
Sports Complex should have been handed over free of cost is false
and misleading. The reason being that the said GR dated
24.02.2003 in respect of sports infrastructure development
guidelines is applicable to the entire state of Maharashtra, whereas
the GR dated 06.01.1994 is specific to the lands within the
jurisdiction of NMMC wherein CIDCO is the NTDA and Lessor
of all lands. Hence for this particular case, the said GR dated
06.01.1994 shall be applicable. The said GR dated 06.01.1994
specifically mentions the rates at which the various categories of
public utility and social facility plots are to be handed over to the
NMMC. The said GR does not mention that Sports Complex are
to be handed over free of cost. Hence, CIDCO has rightly
calculated the price as per the prevailing Land Pricing and
Disposal Policy, which is approved by the State Govt. Hence the
submission of the Petitioner is false and misleading. Further based
on the GR dated 26.03.2003, issued by the under Secretary, Social
Justice, Sports and Special Assistance Department, the District
Sports Officer Thane was in correspondence with CIDCO for
allotment of land for development of a Sports Complex under the
said Sports Infrastructure Development Plan. The CIDCO had
offered to allot a suitable plot to the District Sports Officer Thane
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
vide letters dated 04.02.2003, 13.11.2003 and 19.05.2004,
however, no such detailed proposal was received from the said
District Sports Officer, but a request was made for allotment of the
land free of cost. Accordingly, CIDCO vide letter dated
02.02.2007 requested the District Sports Officer to obtain specific
Orders from the Govt. in case the said land for District Sports
Complex is to be handed over free of cost. Further vide letter dated
31.10.2007, CIDCO had issued a final reminder to the District
Sports Officer regarding the said plot of 5.0 Ha. However, the said
District Sports Officer failed to obtain such Orders/directives from
the Govt. Thus, CIDCO has given sufficient opportunity to the
District Sports Officer, Thane to obtain directives from the Govt.
which was not issued by the state of Maharashtra. Hence the claim
of the Petitioner is false and misleading."
(emphasis supplied)
The affidavit accordingly, submits that there is nothing unlawful in the
CIDCO proposing to allot the land to respondent No.5.
Affidavit of Respondent No.5 - M/s. Progressive Homes
27. Respondent No.5 being an allottee of plot no.4 Sector 12 Ghansoli
has opposed the petitioner's case of being beneficiary of the allotment of
the said plot being a part of the plot reserved for the State Government
Sport Complex. Respondent No.5 was allotted the said plot admeasuring
9837.49 sq. meters as per the brochures/public notice inviting bids thereof
by CIDCO. The case of the petitioner to the effect that such plot is
situated in the middle of the contiguous land reserved for Government of
Maharashtra Sports Complex, is being contested by respondent No.5 on
the ground that CIDCO was within its authority as new town
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
development authority, to invite bids for the said plots and even by
discarding the position that the said plot alongwith the larger area was
earmarked for the Sports Complex, respondent No.5 has contended that
having participated in a valid tender issued by the CIDCO and having
succeeded in the bidding process and after paying the necessary lease
premium amount to the CIDCO, respondent No.5 is legitimately entitled
for the said plot and would be entitled to develop the said plot for which
the tender was issued. The petitioner's case that CIDCO did not have
authority to change the user of the said plot from Government Sports
Complex to residential zone, is being denied on the ground that the
petitioner has no locus to question the authority of CIDCO, irrespective of
the fact that NMMC was constituted as the planning authority for the
Navi Mumbai area in the year 1991. It is further contended that the
petitioner's case that it is of utmost necessity for the Government to have a
Sports Complex for Navi Mumbai is misconceived as there are already
other sport complexes, the details of which are set out in paragraph 7(g). It
is contended that Plot No.4 being lawfully allotted to respondent No.5 as
also lease premium being paid and the possession of the plot being handed
over to respondent no. 5, this petition ought not to be entertained for any
relief against respondent no. 5. It is further contended that already a 36
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
acres sports complex is being developed by NMMC and thus, there is no
separate need for Government Sports Complex. The affidavit raises
contentions referring to the provisions of the MRTP Act and as to how
CIDCO would be entitled to allot plots of land in question to the
petitioner. There is a rejoinder affidavit filed by the petitioner opposing
the contentions as urged by respondent No. 5.
Reply Affidavit of the NMMC
28. There is a reply affidavit dated 16 September 2019 filed on behalf of
the NMMC of Shri. Hemant R. Thakur, Assistant Director of Town
Planning, NMMC. The affidavit states that plot no.1, Sector 13, Ghansoli
admeasuring 145452.96 sq. mtrs. has been earmarked for use as Sports
Complex in CIDCO's Nodal Plan, which was the land vested with
CIDCO. It is stated that the said plot was allotted for development of
Sports Complex by the NMMC, by way of lease for a period of 60 years
vide letter dated 28 June 2013. It is stated that such plot is being
developed by NMMC for Municipal Sports Complex, the plans in that
regard also being sanctioned. It is next stated that adjacent to the said Plot
No. 1 in Sector 13, there are two plots in Sector 12 and Sector 12A in
Ghansoli Node, which were earmarked by CIDCO for use as 'Government
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
of Maharashtra Sports Complex'. It is stated that the original development
plan, which was prepared by CIDCO and sanctioned by Government of
Maharashtra and which came into effect from 1st March 1980 was merely
a Sectoral Plan, which only indicated zoning. It is stated that after sanction
of the said development plan, CIDCO had prepared node-wise Sectoral
Plan, wherein required civil amenities have been earmarked by CIDCO. It
is stated that it is not clear as to whether the said plots in Sector 12 and
12A in Ghansoli Node earmarked by CIDCO for use as 'Government of
Maharashtra Sports Complex' were handed over by CIDCO to the
Collector, Thane or to the Sports Authority of Government of
Maharashtra. It is further stated that there were demands made by
residents as well as local representatives to extend Municipal Sports
Complex which is being developed at Plot No. 1, Sector 13 to the adjacent
lands i.e. land measuring 19877.31 sq. mtrs. and land admeasuring
72066.75 sq. mtrs. forming part of Sector 12A. It is stated that the
General Body of the Municipal Corporation adopted a Resolution No.
338 dated 23 September 2013 for reservation of the said additional land as
extension to Sports Complex. The details of the said additional land are set
out in the affidavit in tabular form.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
29. It is next stated that a proposal to modify the CIDCO's
Development Plan was initiated by Municipal Corporation and notice to
that effect under Section 37 (1) of the Maharashtra Regional & Town
Planning Act 1966 was issued on 4 December 2013 and published in the
Maharashtra Government Gazette, with a view to invite suggestions and
objections from general public. It is contended that after completing the
procedure as envisaged under Section 37 of the Act, NMMC submitted
that a proposal for modification of the development plan to the State
Government vide letter dated 2 June 2014, for its final sanction under
Section 37 (ii) of the Act. It is stated that as per such proposal of the
Municipal Corporation, an area admeasuring 19877.37 sq. mtrs. on the
Northern side and an area admeasuring 72066.75 sq. mtrs. on Southern
side of the Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex, was proposed to
be reserved for extension of municipal sport complex. It is contended that
however, the Urban Development Department of the Government of
Maharashtra rejected such proposal of NMMC vide its letter dated 9 July
2019 on the ground that the sectoral nodal plan of the CIDCO was not
sanctioned by the Government of Maharashtra and therefore the proposal
initiated by the Municipal Corporation was not in accordance with the
provisions of Section 37 of the MRTP Act. The Government of
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Maharashtra has further recorded that since the Municipal Corporation
had taken up revision of sanctioned development plan, under which the
Municipal Corporation may take cognizance of the modification proposal
while preparing such development plan. It is next stated that the
Municipal Corporation has already prepared a draft development plan
under Section 26 of the MRTP Act and has placed the same before the
General Body of the Municipal Corporation on 11 February 2019 for its
approval. Thus, it is seen from the NMMC's affidavit that in the notice
issued by the NMMC under section 37 of the MRTP Act, plot No.12A
and the vacant plots on northern and southern side of the Government of
Maharashtra Sport Complex, were shown for extension of the sport
complex of NMMC.
Rejoinder Affidavit of the Petitioner
30. There are rejoinder affidavits filed on behalf of the petitioner to the
aforesaid affidavits inter alia contending that the sports policy of
Government of Maharashtra was floated in the year 2001. The affidavit
also refers to a letter of CIDCO to the Town Planning Officer of NMMC
inter alia recording of NMMC's letter seeking NOC for converting
approximately 5750.50 sq. meter area from playground Plot No.22
admeasuring 11,626.51 in Sector 15, Airoli for social facility use, cannot be
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
granted, referring to the Maharashtra State Sports Policy of 2001. It is
stated that such policy prohibits conversion of playground into any other
use. It is stated that the policy clearly states that structures within the area
earmarked for the playground should not be regularized at the cost of
playground and in the event of any such conversion, due permission from
Cabinet is required to be obtained. The contention is thus that the
Maharashtra State Sports Policy 2001 was being meticulously
implemented by the CIDCO and the same was also required to be
implemented for the purpose of Government of Maharashtra Sports
Complex, by not inviting bids and making allotment in favour of
respondent No.5, when the plot was earmarked for Government of
Maharashtra Sports Complex.
Reply affidavit on behalf of the State Government
31. Mr. Jitendra Bhople, Joint Director of Town Planning, Konkan
Division, Navi Mumbai, has filed a reply affidavit on behalf of the State
Government dated 9 February 2021. The affidavit does not specifically
deny the case of the petitioner that the plots in question in Sectors 12 and
13 at all relevant times were earmarked (reserved) for Government of
Maharashtra Sports Complex and which is adjoining to the sports complex
to be developed by the NMMC. The affidavit inter alia states that the
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
CIDCO was entitled to prepare its nodal plans by earmarking the plots as
CIDCO being the New Town Development Authority, it was given
flexibility to allocate the land use of plots which are already earmarked for
a particular purpose to different land use as may be needed by the CIDCO
from time to time. It is further stated that for change of user of any plot in
Nodal Plan, CIDCO was not required to take permission from the State
Government, hence changes in a particular land use did not amount to
modification in the reservation, from the development plans as
contemplated under the MRTP Act. It is stated that in the intervening
period the NMMC was constituted by the State Government on 17
December 1991 under Section 3 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal
Corporation Act, 1949 for the local areas of the revenue villages to be
comprised within the jurisdiction of the municipal corporation, were
shown in the Schedule annexed to the said notification, whereas the
CIDCO was appointed as New Town Development Authority under sub-
section 3A of Section 113 of the MRTP Act and the villages comprised in
the new town have also been shown in the Schedule annexed thereto. It is
stated that the CIDCO had the flexibility to prepare "Nodal Plan" by
earmarking tentative uses and for that sanction from Government was not
required, as the CIDCO was given flexibility to make change in use of such
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
earmarked plots from time to time as would have been deemed fit by the
CIDCO. It is stated that the subject area of 20 acres in Ghansoli Node was
earmarked for the Government Sports Complex by the CIDCO was also a
part of the nodal plan of the CIDCO and the same was never sanctioned
by the Government and thus, it was open for the CIDCO to make change
in the use of that plot without seeking permission from the Government.
It is also confirmed that the State Government did not approve the
NMMC's resolution No.338 dated 23 September 2013 to modify the
CIDCO's development plan. It is therefore submitted that appropriate
orders may be passed by this Court.
Reply Affidavit of Respondent No.8
32. Shri. Pradip Sampatrao Indulkar, respondent No.8 has filed this
affidavit dated 16 March 2021 supporting the petition. He has stated that
respondent No.8 was instrumental in framing and formulating the Sports
Policies of the Government of Maharashtra annexed at Exhibit D and E to
the petition. He has stated that he was pained by the non-compliance of
the said policy by CIDCO. He has stated that the land subject matter of
petition was earmarked for Government Sports Complex pursuant to the
said policies of the State Government. He has summarized the Sport Policy
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
of 2001 of the State Government to contend that under the Government
Resolution dated 24 February 2003, CIDCO reserved 17 hectares plot in
Sector 12 and 13 for NMMC sports complex and 8 hectare plot for the
Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex in Sector 12, Ghansoli, Navi
Mumbai. It is his contention that CIDCO is not a profit making body and
cannot demand exorbitant lease rent and premium from local body which
it has sought from NMMC to allot the land. It is his contention that on
account of the red-tapism, India has not fared as well as it should have, in
international sports, despite having such large population. He has stated
that our sport persons, young children do not get enough facilities,
infrastructure, training, coaching and financial support from the
Government and speaking internationally even the smallest of the
countries have very good infrastructure in terms of ground, astroturf and
other equipments. It is contended that children are encouraged at a very
young age, trained, nurtured and are extended all facilities which is absent
in several areas of our country. It is next contended that sports is one of the
lesser priorities of the Government, with the result our success tally, in
terms of medals at Olympics, especially in individual events, is abysmal in
comparison with other countries and for such reason, the sports policy was
framed, however, it is stated that the same is ignored and has been kept in
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
a deep freezer both by the State Government and CIDCO. He has
commented on the CIDCO's arbitrary policy of change of user of plot for
the purpose as the one in question. He has also contended that there was
an arbitrary decision taken in favour of respondent No.5 to make
allotment whereas the other bidders who have submitted their bids, had
withdrawn their bids knowing that the land in question was earmarked for
Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex. It is accordingly submitted
that the petition be allowed.
Additional Affidavit in Reply of Respondent No.5
33. There is an additional reply affidavit filed on behalf of respondent
No.5 of Mr. Devang Vinod Trivedi, inter alia contending that by
Government Resolution dated 26 March 2021 the State Government has
shifted the proposed regional sport complex from Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai
to Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad for the reasons stated
therein and the said land is already in possession of the Government and
that appropriate budget has also been enhanced by the State Government
for development of the regional sports complex at such place which was
released by a Government Resolution dated 31 March 2021, the budget
for which is proposed at Rs.2400 lakhs. It is stated that such land is a
suitable land than the land reserved at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai, and for
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
such reason nothing would survive in the petition. There are other
contentions as raised on the provisions of the MRTP Act, the contention
being that CIDCO was within its authority to make allotment of land in
question to respondent no.5 which is reiteration of the contentions as
raised in the initial reply affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.5.
Affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.7 (Deputy Director of Sports)
34. An affidavit is filed by one Mrs. Snehal Sampat Salunkhe, Deputy
Director, Sports and Youth Services, Mumbai Division, Mumbai on behalf
of respondent No.7. The affidavit comments about the Maharashtra State
Sports Policy, 2001 to say that under such policy the Government
introduced a concept of various Sports Complexes at different levels. It is
stated that to implement the said scheme, Government Resolution dated
24 February 2003 was issued by the Government of Maharashtra,
whereunder it was proposed to create the District Sports Complex and
Divisional Sports Complex of National & International Standards. As to
what would be the sport activities which would be undertaken and
nurtured at such sport complexes is set out in paragraph 5 of the said
affidavit. It is further stated that a further sports policy was declared in the
year 2012 wherein it was decided to establish 'Greater Mumbai Sports
Authority', which will look after the creation of ward wise sport complexes
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
and district sports complexes at Mumbai City, Mumbai Suburban and
New Mumbai. It is contended that since there was dispute pertaining to
land at Ghansoli, the Government of Maharashtra by Government
Resolution dated 26 March 2021 granted administrative approval for
construction of Divisional Sport Complex Konkan Division at Nanore
Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad.
35. It is stated that under the policy of the Government, the Sport
Complexes shall be selected from the places which are convenient for
transportation and administration for citizens and persons concerned. It is
stated that the land at Sector No 12 and 12 A, Ghansoli, Mumbai if
developed as sports complex, it can fulfill the need of growing populations
in the large adjoining areas as set out in paragraph 11 of the affidavit. The
following contents of the affidavit are required to be noted which read
thus:
"11. I say that, as per the policy of the Government, the Sport
Complexes shall be selected from the places which are convenient
for transportation and administration for citizens and persons
concerned. The land at Sector No 12 and 12 A, Ghansoli, Mumbai
if developed as sports complex, it can fulfill the need of growing
populations in the areas of Municipal corporations such as Thane,
Navi Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivali, Mira-Bhyandar, Vasai - Virar,
Ulhasnagar & Panvel and the same is convenient for the
transportation to Mumbai and Kokan Division and also helpful for
the International Sports Events which will be hosted in future in
the State of Maharashtra.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
12. I say that, in view of above policy of Government, the land
which is subject matter of the present Petition, can be developed
for the creation of Sports Complex of International Standard. 1 say
that for establishing various sports playground such as Astroturf
hockey ground, playground for football, handball, kabbadi, kho-
kho, basketball court, tennis court, shooting and swimming pool
etc, the authority required huge land to satisfy the requirement of
Sports Grounds of International Standards.
13. I say that, the development of the said plot for sports
complex of international standard is possible with Joint Venture
with New Mumbai Municipal Corporation and CIDCO. However,
there is no correspondence from the CIDCO regarding allotment
of plot at Sector No. 12 and 12A, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai, to this
respondent which was earmarked for Regional Sports Complex.
14. I further say that, the All Indian Football Association has
hosted FIFA U-I7 World Cup, 2017, AFC Women's Asian Cup,
2022 and FIFA U-I7 Women's World Cup, 2022 at New Mumbai.
Considering the organization of the International World
tournaments, it is necessary to develop supplementary stadiums/
sports complexes at New Mumbai for the catering needs of the
International Events. Therefore this Respondent by its letter dated
24.11.2022 requested to handover the land allotted for the sports
department free of cost. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit-E
is the copy of the said letter dated 24.11.2022."
(emphasis supplied)
36. It is, therefore, prayed that appropriate orders be passed.
Additional Affidavit in Reply to the amended petition filed by CIDCO
37. There is an additional affidavit in reply to the amended petition
filed on behalf of CIDCO of Mr. Venugopal V., Chief Planner dated 27
March 2023 reiterating the contentions as urged in the earlier affidavit and
denying the case of the petitioner in the amended petition as also the
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
contentions as urged on behalf of respondent No.8, and supporting its
decision to allot the plot in favour of respondent no.5.
38. A rejoinder affidavit is also filed on behalf of the petitioner to such
affidavit. Also there is further affidavit dated 28 July 2023 filed on behalf
of respondent No.5 to bring the subsequent developments on record.
39. An additional reply affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 6 is
filed by Mr. Aseemkumar Gupta, Principal Secretary (UD-1), Urban
Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, which is a common
affidavit filed in pursuance of the directions of this Court inter alia placing
on record the outcome of the joint meeting which was held in pursuance
of the order dated 14 July 2023 passed by this Court. The significant
statements in affidavit are contained in paragraphs 3 to 6 of the said
affidavit which read thus:-
"3. I say that in the said meetings, a) it was decided that the
Sports Complex being proposed on the said land of CIDCO is of
International level. Cost of the development is going to be
recovered by commercially exploiting 1/3rd of the land in
question. However, cost of the land itself has not been factored in
the total cost of the project and that is about 2500/- crores as per
CIDCO's expectation from sale. Thus effectively the proposal is of
an International Stadium on the 2/3rd of land for a cost of 2500/-
crores for the public (whether it is borne by N.M.M.C., State
Government or CIDCO, this is public money). The issue then is
whether to have an International Sports Complex at this cost and
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
if yes, then where in the State. It is clear that State should decide
as a policy about various levels of Sports Complexes from City to
District to Division to State to National to International levels -
and various right locations for these. State must also, as a policy,
decide total amount of public money that may be allocated to
these complexes. Indirectly by asking CIDCO to part away with
the land without any compensation for the project inherently
means that an International level Sports Complex is desired by a
City at the cost of 2500/- crores without any deliberations and
policy at the State level. City has a duty to make a city level sports
complexes of required number to its citizens but may also aspire to
have higher level of Sports Complexes as it adds to city's stature
and attraction, while adding facilities for its own citizens of higher
standard. This however cannot be at a cost of some other
Organization. Thus N.M.M.C. must decide whether it wishes to
have an International standard of Sports Complex at the cost of
2500/- crores and if yes, then it must make value of the land
available to CIDCO. If N.M.M.C. does not want to take up cost
fully of the land it may request State Government for the funds
and State Government (Sports Department) may decide on the
basis of its policy. CIDCO has already made available spaces for
sports as per the norms (and more) and also the 14.5 Ha of land
just adjacent to the said land is handed over to N.M.M.C. for
Sport Complex thus cannot be asked to transfer this land free of
cost to N.M.M.C. for the sports complex. If N.M.M.C. does not
show interest in purchase of land at market value from CIDCO in
a reasonable time frame, CIDCO should be allowed to proceed
with its own plan.
b) It is further decided that Whatever may be the final
utilization of the plot, third party rights already created towards
M/s. Progressive Group must be respected. Thus CIDCO should
relocate / realign their plot, if necessary, as per mutual consent
with Respondent No.5 only, so that whatever is the final use to
which the land is put to, is not affected adversely by location of
this plot. Representatives of Progressive Group agreed to the
suggestion.
c) Thus it was decided that CIDCO would realign or relocate
on the same road in sector-12, Ghansoli free from any reservation
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
of proposed N.M.M.C. draft DP reservation Plan, Encroachment,
CRZ, Wetland, Mangroves and Forest Reservation etc. and should
not come in purview of section 46 of M.R.T.P. Act to grant C.C.
after realign or relocate.
d) Issue of authority to put reservation by N.M.M.C. on
undeveloped ownership lands of CIDCO was discussed in detail.
There should be no ambiguity about the authority of various
Organizations like N.M.M.C. and CIDCO about putting and
developing reservations on various lands in CIDCO area. This
should be done on priority by Urban Development Department at
the earliest.
4. I say that thereafter, this Hon'ble Court by Order dated
24.08.2023 expressed its displeasure about the incomplete stand
taken by both the Departments in above matter and directed both
the Departments to place on record an affidavit, as to what is the
decision of the State Government in the light of the conclusions
drawn in the said meetings held on 24th July, 2023 and 9th
August, 2023 held under the Chairmanship of the Principal
Secretary Urban Development Department in pursuance of Court
Orders.
5. I say that thereafter, on 26.09.2023, a joint meeting was
conducted under the Chairmanship of the Hon'ble Deputy Chief
Minister (Finance & Planning). I say that in the said meeting
dated 26.09.2023, issue regarding the said plot was resolved in
finally. It was decided that the portion of 5 acres out of the CRZ
affected Land shall be handed over by CIDCO to the Navi
Mumbai Municipal Corporation free of charge. As the CRZ
affected land is in both the Sector-12 and Sector-12A Ghansoli,
therefore the said area of 5 Acres of the CRZ affected Land is
required to be. identified by the CIDCO (by excluding the Plot
No. 4 in Sector-12, Ghansoli allotted to the Respondent No.5)
and be given to the NMMC free of charge and it was further
decided that the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation shall use
the said 5 acres of CRZ affected land along with earlier allotted
plot No.1 of 36 acres, Sector-13, Ghansoli for building sports
complex of International Level. It was decided that Navi Mumbai
Municipal Corporation will develop the sports complex at its own
cost. It was decided that the School Education and Sports
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Department should provide the technical assistance to the Navi
Mumbai Municipal Corporation. It was also decided that the
CIDCO would be free to commercially utilize the remaining 37
acres of lands out of 42 acres land in Sector- 12 and/or Sector-
12A, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai. It is also decided that, the Regional
Sports Complex at Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad shall
be constructed by combining Taluka Level Sports Complex and
Konkan Regional Sports Complex. I say that the said meeting was
attended by the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development
Department, Principal Secretary of School Education and Sports
Department, Managing Director of CIDCO and Commissioner of
Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation. Copy of minutes of the
meeting dated 26.09.2023 is annexed hereto and marked as
Exhibit-2.
6. I say that accordingly, now the following steps will be taken
in the matter:
i. CIDCO will allot 5 acres area out of the CRZ
affected land (after excluding the Plot No.4 allotted to the
Respondent No. 5) in Sector-12, Ghansoli and/or of the
CRZ affected land in Sector-12 A, Ghansoli to the Navi
Mumbai Municipal Corporation at free of charge.
ii. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation shall develop
International sports complex in the total area comprising of
36 acres land (already allotted by CIDCO) and the said 5
acres portion of CRZ affected land as mentioned above.
iii. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation shall develop
International sports complex on the said plots of land at its
own cost. The School and Education and Sports
Department should provide technical to the Navi Mumbai
Municipal assistance Corporation.
iv. The CIDCO shall be free to commercially utilize
remaining area of 37 acres of the lands in Sector-12 and/or
Sector-12 A, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai.
v. The Regional Sports Complex at Nanore, Taluka
Mangaon, District Raigad shall be constructed by
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
combining Taluka Level Sports Complex and Regional
Sports Complex.
vi. In case the Plot No. 4, Sector-12, Ghansoli allotted
to the Respondent No.5 (M/s. Progressive Homes) will be
needed to be realigned/ adjusted by the CIDCO i.e.
Respondent No.1, then it should be acceptable
realignment/ adjustment to Respondent No.5 and it should
be relocated/realigned on the same road and in the Sector-
12, Ghansoli and such realigned plot should be free from
any reservation of proposed N.M.M.C. draft DP
Reservation Plan, Encroachment, CRZ, Wetland,
Mangroves, Forest reservation, etc. As per Section 46 of the
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, while
issuing the commencement certificate, the Planning
Authority should ensure that there is no hindrance in the
use of the such realigned plot according to the purpose and
use for which the said plot has been allotted by the
CIDCO."
(emphasis supplied)
Rejoinder Affidavit of the petitioner to the State's additional reply
affidavit
40. On behalf of the petitioner, a rejoinder affidavit to the State
Government's affidavit has been filed of Mr. Kaushal Jadia dated 10
October 2023, disputing the contentions as contained in affidavit of Mr.
Aseemkumar Gupta, Principal Secretary, contending that such affidavit as
filed is totally one sided and not as per the suggestions of this Court to
bring about an amicable resolution of the dispute, and that none of the
considerations are shown in the affidavit in regard to the Government
Policy, CIDCO land pricing & Land Disposal Policy etc. in filing of such
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
affidavit. It is stated that the affidavit does not take into consideration the
overall suggestions which were made on behalf of the petitioner in the
meeting. It is stated that despite public cause being pursued by the
petitioner, he was not invited in the meeting which was held under the
Chairmanship of Deputy Chief Minister (Finance and Planning) wherein
all stake-holders were invited except the petitioner. The affidavit caters to
personal and private interest, is the contention of the petitioner. It is
contended that the contention about the land cost is not correct and that
as per the 2003 policy the land ought to have been handed over by
CIDCO to the Sports Department "free cost". It is stated that if at all the
cost of the land was to be calculated, it ought to have been calculated on
the basis of Government approved Land Pricing Policy of CIDCO of
2007. It is contended that based on such policy the land cost for an area of
42 acres worked out to around Rs.44 crores as per even today's ready
reckoner rate. It is contended that alleged cost of Rs.2500 crores has
factored in the total cost of the project as allegedly made in the affidavit.
There are several other contentions which are raised to contend that
systematically the development of the Sports Complex at Ghansoli is being
defeated.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
41. There is also an affidavit of Respondent No.8 in response to the
affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.2 dated 11 October 2023, to
contend that in filing such affidavit, respondent No.1 as also respondent
No.2 have acted in gross violation of the Land Disposal Policy and have
illegally and fraudulently allotted portion of prime land designated for
public purpose in gross violation and contravention of Rule 4 of Navi
Mumbai Disposal of Land Rules, 1971, as also there is a breach of Rules of
Business, by changing the reservation for sports complex without cabinet
approval. It is contended that the settled law that public interest is
paramount, which needs to be protected over private interest, has no
recognition in the reply affidavits.
Further Affidavit in Reply on behalf of State Government
42. There is further affidavit dated 17 October 2023 filed on behalf of
respondent No.6 of Mr. Ranjit Singh Deol, Principal Secretary, School
Education and Sports Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, inter alia stating
that CIDCO by its letters dated 4 February 2003, 19 May 2004, 2
February 2007 and 31 October 2007, informed the Sports Department
that grant of land free of charge was not possible for CIDCO and the
Sports Department could take the said land only after paying price as per
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Pricing Policy of CIDCO. It is stated that the Sports Department could not
acquire the land from CIDCO at the cost, as expected by CIDCO, hence,
it appears that CIDCO proceeded to dispose of the said land. It is stated
that in the meantime the State Government decided to construct the
Divisional Sports Complex for Konkan Region at Village Nanore, Taluka
Mangaon, District Raigad instead of Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai. It is also
stated that by letter dated 24 November 2022, the State Government
requested the CIDCO to complete the formalities in handing over the said
plot of land to the Sports Department, however, such letter was written
without referring to the correspondence of CIDCO and CIDCO had
reiterated its stand that the said plot could not be given free of costs. It is
stated that considering the difference of opinion between Department of
School Education and Sports and Urban Development Department,
meeting of all the concerned took place on 24 July 2023 and 9 August
2023 and the Principal Secretaries of both the departments were present.
It is stated that such meeting concluded with a finding that CIDCO would
be entitled to charge sale price for the purpose of the concerned plot. It
was also decided that the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation should
pay the cost of such plot and if Corporation would not be in a position to
pay, Sports Department should acquire the said plot out of its budgetary
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
provision and value of the said plot was quoted at Rs.2500 crores by
CIDCO. It is stated that in view of such different stands taken by both the
Departments, another meeting took place on 26 September 2023 under
the Chairmanship of Deputy Chief Minister and Finance Minister,
wherein the Minister of Sports and Minister of Women and Child
Development and Principal Secretaries of both the Departments were
present. It is stated that in such meeting the issue was resolved by
providing that the CIDCO would provide an area of 5 acre out of the
entire area of 42 acre, to the NMMC for the purpose of development of
International Level Sports Complex, by using adjacent plot of 36 acre
already granted to NMMC which would be provided free of charge and
CIDCO would be free to commercially utilize remaining 37 acre out of the
42 acre of plot which was to be utilized for Government Sports Complex.
It was also confirmed that the development of Regional Sports Complex at
village Nanore, District Raigad would be achieved. It is stated that
considering the overall situation, the Sports Department has decided to
give up the initial proposal of developing sports complex in 42 acre plot at
Ghansoli and such decision was taken in the larger interest and
considering that the NMMC now has granted larger area of 36 acre plus 5
acre for the construction of international level Sports Complex.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Further Affidavit on behalf of State Government
43. There is further affidavit of Mr. Ranjit Singh Deol, Principal
Secretary, School Education and Sports Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai,
dated 19 October 2023 clarifying as to how the decision of giving up the
proposal for construction of Sports Complex at Ghansoli was arrived at. It
is stated that by the Government Resolution dated 26 March 2021 it was
decided to make available the land admeasuring 24 acres for construction
of Divisional Sports Complex at Survey No. 130 at Village Nanore, Taluka
Mangaon, District Raigad and estimated cost of Rs.8344.16 lakhs has also
been approved, subject to availability of applicable grant. It is stated that
the said land admeasuring 24 acres at Survey No. 130 was actually taken
over and transferred in the name of Divisional Sports Complex, Executive
Committee and the grant of Rs. 240 lakhs has been disbursed by the State
Government to the Executive Committee on 31 March, 2021. It is stated
that further grant of Rs. 1,068.20 lakhs has been disbursed by the State
Government to the Executive Committee on 30 March, 2022. It is stated
that the State Government is taking all due steps for construction of the
Divisional Sports Complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District
Raigad. It is further stated that as far as the proposed International Sports
Complex at Ghansoli is concerned, the Sports Department will provide all
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
requisite technical assistance to NMMC, for the purpose of construction of
International Sports Complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai.
Additional Reply on behalf of NMMC
44. There is an additional affidavit in reply on behalf of respondent
No.3 by Mr. Dilip Nerkar, Deputy Municipal Commissioner, (Estate),
NMMC, dated 19 October 2023 to contend that additional 5 acres of
land, to be allotted free of cost by the CIDCO would be utilized only for
establishing the International Level Sports Complex and for no other
purpose.
45. It is on such backdrop, we have heard learned Counsel for the
parties.
(D) Submissions on behalf of the petitioner
46. Mr. Indrajeet Kulkarni, learned Counsel has made submissions on
behalf of the petitioner to contend that the decision of the State
Government to not pursue the allotment/taking over plots in Sector Nos.
12 and 12A at Ghansoli, for the purpose of Government International
Sports Complex and the decision of purportedly shifting the sports
complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, are arbitrary and illegal. It is
submitted that the reasons which are set out in the affidavit of Mr.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Aseemkumar Gupta for the first time stating that CIDCO would be
required to pay exorbitant amount by the State Government, is a complete
eye wash. It is submitted that in fact Shri Ranjit Singh Deol, Principal
Secretary, Sports Department has categorically stated that CIDCO had
quoted the value of land to be utilized by the State Government at
Rs.2500 crores, is unconscionable and in fact a falsity, as there is no
document more so as per law where the CIDCO had sought for such
exorbitant amount from the State Government. It is his submission that
such figures are being set out to prejudice the Court and wholly without
any basis. It is his submission that in fact such land ought to have been
handed over to the State Government free of cost as per the Sport Policy of
the State Government as the same was earmarked for such purpose in the
year 2003.
47. It is next submitted that it is unthinkable that at a place 150 km.
away from the urban agglomeration any sports complex could be
developed, as necessarily the sport activities are required to be developed
in the heart of the urban agglomeration like Ghansoli in the immediate
proximity of not only Mumbai Municipal area but also Navi Mumbai
Municipal area, Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal area, Ulhasnagar Municipal
area, Mira-Bhayander Municipal area and with the availability of all modes
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
of transportation and other facilities as stated in the affidavit of Mrs.
Snehal Sampat Salunkhe filed on behalf of State Government/Deputy
Director of Sports. It is submitted that it cannot be that children travel at a
place which is 150 km away for the purpose of availing facilities of sports
activities. It is thus submitted that this is a case where not only the CIDCO
but also the State Government has acted illegally and more particularly in
taking a decision that the land admeasuring 20 acres earmarked for the
Government Sports Complex, which would aid the NMMC Sports
Complex, would be now available to the CIDCO for commercial
exploitation. It is submitted that at all material times, the said land was
earmarked and available for allotment for the Government Sports
Complex. It is submitted that the CIDCO's contention, as supported by
the State Government and respondent no. 5, that as the land has been
allotted at Village Nanore, the petition has became academic, is also
untenable as all such decisions are taken during the pendency of the
petition and the decisions are illegal and subject matter of challenge in the
present petition. It is submitted that the decision of this Court in Public
Interest Litigation No.22 of 2021 in the case of Nishant Karsan Bhagat vs.
The City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. &
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Ors.1, although would recognize the rights of the CIDCO, in the present
case the same may not be applicable insofar as the land was earmarked by
CIDCO for Government sports complex. In support of his contention,
reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s. Popcorn
Entertainment & Anr vs City Industrial Development Corpn. 2.
48. Mr. Kulkarni has made extensive submissions drawing our attention
to the record to submit that looked from any angle, the decision of
CIDCO not to allot the land at Ghansoli for Government sports complex
and the decision of State Government in not taking such land and shifting
the Government sports complex to Village Nanore are patently illegal. He
has also drawn our attention to various inconsistencies in the affidavits
which are filed on behalf of the Sports department, State Government and
CIDCO to submit that this is a classic case where each of these authorities
are attempting to misguide the Court so as to support the cause of private
exploitation of the land earmarked for a public purpose.
(E) Submissions on behalf of Respondent no. 8 supporting the
petitioner:-
49. Ms. Sangalikar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent
No.8 has supported the petition. She has contended that respondent No.2
1 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1758
2 (2015) 1 SCC 558
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
- State Government has violated the Government Resolution dated 24
February 2003 and 26 March, 2003 which were for establishment of
Sports Complex in each revenue region, taluka and district level, under
which sport complexes of international standard were to be developed by
allotment of land free of occupancy price and free of revenue for Mumbai
region. It is contended that CIDCO, contrary to such government
decision, had illegally changed the user of the plot earmarked for the
Government Sports Complex and allotted a portion of plot designated for
Government Sports Complex to respondent No.5 without invitation of
tender. She submits that tenders were invited for Plot Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 as
shown in the plan and it was only one person who bid for plot no.4 which
was respondent No.5 which came to be allotted to him. It is submitted that
however, some private negotiations took place in November, 2016
between CIDCO and respondent no.5 and a portion of Plot No. 3 was
mischievously numbered as Plot No.4, which has the same dimensions as
the plot for which tender was invited, being the land which was designated
for the Government Sports complex, being illegally allotted to Respondent
no. 5 without following the well settled principles of law as laid down by
the Supreme Court. It is contended that the user of plot No.3, which was
not listed in the tender, was illegally changed on the day tender was
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
opened i.e. on 1 September 2016 without there being the required coram
of Officers. It was submitted that it was a premeditated decision in
furtherance to allot this Plot No. 4 carved out of Plot No.3 to Respondent
No.5. It is submitted that all such actions depict favoritism, arbitrariness
on the part of Respondent Nos. l and 2. It is next submitted that despite
NMMC's resolution to amalgamate and acquire additional land for
establishing a sports complex of international standard, respondent No. l
has purportedly claimed a heavy price for allotting the land which ought to
have been allotted free of occupancy price, which is contrary to sports
policy of allotting land free of cost to the State Government. It is
submitted that CIDCO is constituted by the State Government and now
CIDCO is making such claim, which is totally illegal and contrary to the
policies of the State Government which are binding on CIDCO. It is
submitted that it is on false premise, respondent No.2 has contended that
there was lack of enough space and therefore, it was thought appropriate
to transfer the Government Sports Complex to Village Nanore. It is
submitted that what has actually happened is that instead of 20 acres
being earmarked, 24 acres at a remote place has been allotted. It is
submitted that in fact at Village Nanore the State Government had already
established a sports complex but it is not functional for several years. It is
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
submitted that the latest photographs of Nanore Sports Complex present a
different picture. It is submitted that the State Government can issue
directives under Section 154 to ensure that the provisions of law are
obeyed and it cannot be that the CIDCO would act in breach of such
Government orders. It is contended that for commercial reason, CIDCO
has changed the user of Plot No.3 designated for Government Sports
Complex to future development. It is submitted that respondent No.1 is
not a commercial concern and land acquired and entrusted to it cannot be
permitted to be parted with by the sole consideration of money making as
held by the Supreme Court in Padma Vs Hiralal Motilal Desarda & Ors.3.
It is next submitted that Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have sought to
compromise public interest to protect private interest. It is submitted that
the affidavit of the State Government dated 5 October 2023 and the
minutes of the meeting as annexed to the same clearly mentioned that
private interest needs to be protected. In support of such contention
reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIDCO vs.
Platinum Entertainment and ors.4.
3 (2002)7 SCC 564
4 Civil Appeal No.9264 of 2014 decision dt.26 September 2014.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
(F) Submissions on behalf of Respondent no. 5
50. Mr. Jahagirdar, learned senior counsel for respondent no.5 has made
extensive submissions opposing the petition. At the outset, Mr. Jahagirdar
has drawn our attention to the reply affidavits filed on behalf of
respondent no.5. His primary contention is that CIDCO was within its
authority to issue the tender in which respondent no.5 had participated
and was the successful bidder in regard to the allotment of plot no.4. It is
also his submission that respondent no.5 having paid all the amounts for
allotment of the plot and the possession being handed over, the petitioner
would not have any legal right to question the lawful allotment of plot in
question to respondent no.5. It is his submission that the entire case of the
petitioner proceeds on the ground that as if there was a development plan
reservation in respect of the larger land, out of which the plot as allotted to
respondent no.5 has been culled out, Mr. Jahagirdar has drawn our
attention to the provisions of the MRTP Act to contend that the case of
the petitioner on the basis of the CIDCO's plan which is not the
development plan within the meaning of the MRTP Act, is wholly
misconceived. It is his submission that for the petitioner to succeed in the
case, is required to show that the plot of land as allotted to respondent no.5
was part of a statutory reservation and such reservation was sought to be
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
taken away by the CIDCO in the manner not known to law by inviting
bids and allotting the plot to respondent no.5. Mr. Jahagirdar, in
supporting his submission that the CIDCO was also within its rights to
make allotment of plot, has relied on the decision in Nishant Karsan
Bhagat (supra). It is also his submission that the petitioner's argument, is
in fact against the policy of the State Government which has re-called its
decision to have Government Sports Complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai
by shifting the same to Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad.
It is next submitted that the rights of respondent no.5 in no manner can be
affected for the reason that the petitioner have never challenged the tender
issued by the CIDCO in which respondent no.5 had participated and the
allotment made in favour of respondent no.5. Mr. Jahagirdar has
accordingly prayed for dismissal of the petition.
(G) Submissions on behalf of Respondent No.3-NMMC
51. Mr. Dande, learned counsel has made submissions on behalf of
respondent no.3-NMMC. It is Mr. Dande's submission that the land
adjoining to the land reserved for the Government Sports Complex
admeasuring 36 acres and the additional land of 5 acres which would be
granted to the NMMC by the CIDCO free of cost, would be developed for
a Sports Complex by NMMC. Mr. Dande has not disputed that the land
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
in respect of which the petitioner is ascertaining public rights, was in fact
reserved as a contiguous land proposed for a Government Sports Complex
and that together with the Government Sports Complex and NMMC
Sports Complex, sports facilities were conceived and were intended to be
developed.
(H) Submissions on behalf of CIDCO
52. On behalf of the CIDCO, Mr. Gangal, learned counsel has made
detailed submissions. Mr. Gangal has drawn our attention to reply
affidavits filed on behalf of the CIDCO which he reiterates. It is his
submission that the CIDCO was within its authority and powers as
conferred under the MRTP Act to take a decision to invite the tender to
allot plots from the part of the land as reserved for sports complex under
which respondent no.5 has been allotted plot no. 4 in Sector No.12A. It is
submitted that in law it is not correct for the petitioner to contend that the
land which is claimed to be reserved for sports complex was in any manner
reserved under any development plan. It is submitted that the plan, which
was prepared by the CIDCO at the relevant time, was only indicative of
the land uses and zones and it did not designate specific plot-wise
reservations as conventionally undertaken in preparing a development
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
plan. It is hence submitted that under such plan prepared by CIDCO for
the Navi Mumbai area, plots were only earmarked and not reserved. It is
further submitted that such plans could not have been labelled by the
petitioner as statutory plans and hence, it was not necessary for any MRTP
procedure to be followed before the CIDCO could take a decision to invite
tenders in respect of part of the land under which respondent no.5 has
been allotted plot no.4. Mr. Gangal has submitted that the CIDCO
accordingly was within its authority to have flexible policies in regard to
the change of user of plot and such earmarking of the land could be
changed, as per decisions being taken by the CIDCO from time to time
and in accordance with the regulations governing such allotments. Mr.
Gangal has submitted that the Government of Maharashtra had not
corresponded with CIDCO in regard to the allotment of Ghansoli land for
the purpose of Government Sports Complex for which the said land is
earmarked and hence insofar as CIDCO is concerned, it could be
presumed that the Government of Maharashtra no more intended to have
such land for Government Sports Complex. It is also his submission that
such contention of CIDCO would also stand supported by subsequent
decision taken by the Government of Maharashtra, to have a sports
complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad. It is hence
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
his submission that no relief ought to be granted to the petitioner as public
purpose of setting up of sports complex is already being achieved by the
State Government at Village Nanore, as per recent G. R. dated 26 March,
2021.
53. Mr. Gangal has also submitted that the decision of the Government
to have sports complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District
Raigad is also for the reason that it has been held appropriate by the State
Government to avoid the expenditure the State Government would be
required to incur in availing the Ghansoli plot of land as the cost of
Ghansoli plot of land as per CIDCO's pricing policy was quite substantial.,
as also pointed out in the affidavit filed on behalf of the State
Government. Mr. Gangal in this context has also drawn our attention to
the reply affidavit in regard to the pricing policy of the CIDCO.
54. Mr. Gangal has also submitted that insofar as the petitioner's
challenge to the decision of the CIDCO to allot Plot No.4 to respondent
No.5 needs to be rejected on the ground that the petition needs to be held
to be barred by delay and laches as process of such allotment had
commenced on 2016 and the present petition came to be filed on 23
January 2019. In support of this submission, Mr. Gangal has placed
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
reliance on Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd vs Bombay Environmental
Action Group & Ors.5 and more particularly paragraph 341, as also the
decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Sanjaykumar Damodar
Surve Vs. State of Maharashtra through Secretary & Ors. rendered by a
coordinate Bench of this Court in Public Interest Litigation No.119 of
2022, dated 13 October 2022.
(I) Submissions on behalf of the State Government
55. Mr. Samant, learned Addl. GP has also made submissions. He has
supported the impugned decision of the State Government to give up the
intention of the State Government to have a Government Sports Complex
at Ghansoli on the land as earmarked by CIDCO and subject matter of the
present proceedings. He has also contended that the CIDCO was within
its rights to adopt an appropriate approach and frame policies in regard to
the disposal of the lands and in the light of various directions which were
issued by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 154 of
the MRTP Act. He would accordingly submit that the Court needs to
accept the contention as urged on behalf of the State Government to have
a Sports Complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad.
He has accordingly prayed that the petition be dismissed.
5 2006(3) SCC 434
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
56. Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner and Ms.
Sanglikar on behalf of respondent no.8 have advanced submissions in
rejoinder contesting the submissions as urged on behalf of the other
respondents.
57. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their
assistance, we have perused the record.
(J) REASONS AND CONCLUSION:-
58. On the aforesaid conspectus, the questions which would arise for
our consideration in the present proceedings are:-
i. Whether the State Government is justified to give up the land
in question earmarked in the year 2003 for a Government of
Maharashtra Sports Complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai ?
ii. Whether such land at Ghansoli needs to be developed for the
public purpose of setting up the Government of Maharashtra Sports
Complex, and not to be utilized for any other purpose ?
iii. Was it legal and appropriate for the CIDCO to invite a public
tender to allot land which formed part of the land earmarked for the
Government Sports Complex and in allotting part of the land to
respondent no.5 ?
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
iv. Whether the decision of the State Government to set up a
Sports Complex at Mangaon, District Raigad in lieu of the proposed
sports complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai is legal and valid?
59. The following discussion would aid the answers to the above
questions.
60. As the genesis of the cause relates to the year 2003, at the outset, we
may observe it to be an indisputed position, that the Government of
Maharashtra under the Government order dated 24 February, 2003
ordained to activate the comprehensive "Sports Policy" of the year 2001,
under which sports complexes were to be set up inter alia at district places.
It is necessary to note the said Government order, which reads thus:-
"Maharashtra State Sports Policy, 2001
available for sports packages regarding
use of land for commercial purposes
Government of Maharashtra
Department of Social Justice, Cultural Affairs, Sports and Special
Assistance,
Ruling no. RKD-2002/PK.121ZKUS-1,
Mantralay Vistar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 032
Dt. 24th February, 2003
Preface:-
As per the Maharashtra State Sports Policy, 2001, "Every village to
have play ground" similarly considering Taluka as one unit,
Government has approved a proposal of providing every Taluka to
have one "Taluka Sports Complex" with minimum facilities for
sports development. Similarly, in order to provide minimum
national and international standard sports facilities at the District
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
level and also to provide minimum international standard sports
facilities at the Divisional level, Taluka Sports Complex, District
Sports Complex and Divisional Sports Complex are being set up in
the entire state. It is expected that the government land required
for sports complex is to be acquired from the Revenue Department
for proposed devolvement of the sports complex and transferred to
sports complex committee for expected development of sports
complex. While such sports complex being created, to meet huge
investment for development as well as expenditure for day to day
maintenance, wherever there is potential for commercial
development at such place land to be used for commercial purpose
to generate funds for establishment of sports complex and
expenditure for maintenance the same matter was under
consideration of Government for granting permission.
Government Order:- For making the space for sports complex
available for sports complex and its use for commercial purposes is
being approved subject to the following terms and conditions.
1) The Collector, as the Chairman of the District Sports
Complex Committee and as the Collector, should identify suitable
Government land for the sports complex or land of local self-
governing bodies and mark the land for sports complex
development and the land in question shall be handed over for
public use over to respective sports Committee, viz. Divisional
Sports Complex Committee, District Sports Complex Committee
and Taluka Sports Complex Committee at free of occupancy price
and free of revenue. The land from local authorities shall be
acquired with their consent with Memorandum of Understanding.
2) The concerned Sports Complex Committee will be able to
use 1/3 of the total area for commercial purposes (i.e. for profitable
purposes). In this way the use of commercial purpose will be
allowed as per users permissible in Development Rules of Mumbai
Municipal Corporation (other Municipal Corporations), local
Municipal Corporations/ Municipal Council / Planning Authority
or Special Planning Authority.
3) The concerned Sports Complex Committee shall have the
right to fix the security deposit, occupancy price for the transfer of
developed commercial unit.
4) The Sports Complex Committee shall have the right to fix
the license fee or monthly license fee for this commercial purpose
i.e. for more profitable use. (Taluka Sports Complex Committee
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
should get the approval of the Collector for both the above
matters)
5) While development of complexes, the Divisional
Commissioner / Collector is being authorized to give approval for
land utilization with financial support, as prescribed on the
principle of Build and handover / Build, Use and handover / Build
and handover. (The Collector is being declared as the competent
authority to accept the proposal of the Taluka Sports Complex
Committee.)
6) All the proceeds from commercial use will be allowed to be
kept for the development of the respective sports complex and the
condition of giving a pail of the unearned amount to the
Government will not be applicable.
7) Use, transfer and finance the use of this land, build and
transfer or build on the principle of construction and return as per
general terms and conditions attached to Appendix-A, but subject
to the provisions of the MIDAS Act.
8) Land made available for Government Sports Complex
cannot be transferred / sold / leased to any other department or
private person without the prior permission of the Collector.
9) Right to make appropriate amendments in the above terms
and conditions depending on the place and time shall remain
subject to the administrative department.
This decision is being issued with the consent of Revenue
and Forest Department as well as Finance Department.
By Order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra,
Sd/-
(Pradip Indulkar)
Under Secretary, Government of Maharashtra."
(emphasis supplied)
61. Thus, under the aforesaid directives, it was necessary for the State
Government to identify suitable Government land for the sports complex
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
or land of local self-governing bodies and earmark the land for a sports
complex for such land to be handed over for public use. Once such land
was made available for Government Sports Complex, it cannot be
transferred, sold or leased not only to any other department, but also a
private person except with prior permission of the State Government.
62. By further Government Resolution dated 26 March, 2003, the State
Government furthering its objective to achieve that the athletes from the
State participate in different games namely Asiad, Olympics and world
Championship, resolved that necessary efforts in such direction are
required to be taken to chalk out a figured programme and take a planned
action, for which it was thought appropriate to make available the
appropriate sports infrastructure in furtherance of the sports policy of the
State. Hence, for creation of sports facilities under the Maharashtra Sports
Infrastructure, a Government Resolution dated 26 March, 2003 came to
be issued, so as to have a district sports complex to be set up in every
district inter alia with international standard sports infrastructure as also
divisional sports complex with international standard sports infrastructure
to be set up in each of the revenue division. The Government Resolution
also provided that it was proposed to prepare a special action plan under
the 2001 Sports Policy for the development of sports in Mumbai city and
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
under such plan, one divisional sports complex for Mumbai city and also
for Konkan Division shall be set up at "Thane-Navi Mumbai". It was
provided that also two district sports complexes and twenty taluka sports
complexes shall be set up for two districts i.e. Mumbai city and Mumbai
suburban. The Government Resolution made various provisions on
funds, recurring expenditure, private investment and implementing
agency. However, what is significant are the provisions for objective and
guiding principles under which it was provided that general students shall
have entry in the complexes free of cost, instead of providing facilities to
the persons from elite class or from higher class of the society. Thus, a
progressive provision was made in this Government Resolution. It would
be imperative to extract this Government Resolution which provides for a
comprehensive sports policy and objectives to be achieved. It reads thus:-
"(Official Translation of a photocopy of a GOVERNMENT
RESOLUTION, printed in Marathi)
Exhibit "E"
Maharashtra State Sports Policy, 2001 to
create sports facilities under the
Maharashtra Sports Infrastructure
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA
Social Justice, Cultural Affairs, Sports and Special Assistance Department
Government Resolution Number : S.S.P.-2003/M.No.11/S.Y.S.-1,
Mantralaya Extension Building,
Mumbai 400032
Date : 26th March, 2003.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
PREFACE :- The Maharashtra State has fixed its next objective to see
that the athletes from the State participate in Asiad, Olympics and world
Championship games and for that purpose, it is necessary to make efforts
in a specific direction, to chalk out a figured programme and to take
planned action. It is also necessary to make available the appropriate
sports infrastructure in every village for the athletes of Maharashtra to
give sparkling performance at the Asian and global level. For that
purpose, it is necessary to include even the private investors, Corporate
Bodies, private companies in this objective and to take the name of
Maharashtra to the top in the field of sports. In view thereof,
Maharashtra Sports Infrastructure Development Plan has been prepared.
As per the Sports Policy, 1996 of the Maharashtra State, approval
was granted to set up District Sports Complex for creating various sports
facilities at the district places and also to start District Sports Training
Centre in one Taluka of each District as a Pilot project. However,
considering the funds made available under this Scheme, increasing rates
of construction works, changes in the technology and other aspects, there
is a necessity to carry out changes on a large scale in the entire scheme.
Under the Maharashtra State Sports Policy, 2001, the Taluka has been
considered as an Unit for development of Sports and it has proposed to
make available minimum facilities of various sports in the Taluka Sports
Complex in each Taluka on Taluka level and also to make available sports
facilities of national level in the District Sports Complex at District level
and to create sports infrastructure of international standard on divisional
level. Thus, in order to make available these sports infrastructure at all
places in the State in the aforesaid manner, it is proposed to set up 1)
Taluka Sports Complex, 2) District Sports Complex and 3) Divisional
Sports Complex in a modified manner.
GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION :- Now, by superseding the orders
issued from time to time regarding the two schemes viz. Setting up of
Taluka Sports Training Centre, District Sports Complex and also
regarding the Divisional Sports Complex being implemented at present,
approval is granted for further schemes.
1. Taluka Sports Complex shall be set up in every Taluka with
minimum sports infrastructure for various sports.
2. District Sports Complex shall be set up in every district with
minimum national and with additional international standard sports
infrastructure.
3. Divisional sports complex with international standard sports
infrastructure shall be set up in Revenue division wise each Division.
4. Under the Sports Policy, 2001 of the Maharashtra State, it has
been proposed to prepare a special action plan for the development of
sports in Mumbai city and under this plan, one divisional Sports
Complex for Mumbai city and also the divisional sports complex for
Konkan Division shall be set up at Thane-Navi Mumbai. Similarly, two
district sports complexes and twenty taluka sports complexes shall be set
up for two districts viz. Mumbai city and Mumbai suburban.
2. For setting up Taluka Sports Complex at Taluka level, District
Sports Complex at District level and Divisional Sports Complex at
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Divisional level under the Maharashtra Sports Infrastructure
Development Plan, approval is hereby granted for the below-mentioned
revised expenditure.
Sports Complex Prevailing expenditure Proposed expenditure
Taluka Sports Complex Rs.7.00 lakhs Rs.25.00 lakhs
District Sports Complex Rs.200.00 lakhs Rs.400 lakhs
Divisional Sports Complex Rs.1200.00 lakhs Rs. 1600.00 lakhs
Taluka Sports Complex :- Taluka Sports Complex shall be set up in
each Taluka of the State. First of all, the land for the said Taluka Sports
Complex shall be fixed. The Taluka Sports Complex Committee and
Collector shall fix the land for the said Taluka Sports Complex with the
concurrence of the Peoples' Representatives and shall submit the said
proposal for final approval to the Director, Sports and Youth Services for
his concurrence. The said land must possibly be situated at the place of
Taluka Headquarter. However, if any other land is more convenient and
is located at a central place and if all the concerned officers have
consented therefor then, such land may be fixed. The minimum
facilities as mentioned in Appendix "A" appended hereto shall be made
available in the Taluka Sports Complex and as per these facilities, the
same shall be termed as Bronze package, Silver package, gold package
and the said schemes may be implemented as per the availability of funds
and also by using the same for commercial purpose. However, there will
be atleast a bronze package at every place and Taluka Sports Complex
having minimum facilities mentioned therein will be set up.
If the facilities more than the Bronze package are to be made
available, then, the proposal by clearly mentioning about the collection
of funds and by making available the Guarantee letter in respect of the
availability of funds from such Machinery through which the funds
would be made available, shall be submitted to the Director, Sports and
Youth Services for approval. Moreover, as regards various facilities for
the upper package after Bronze package, the facilities will be created as
per the availability of funds from time to time. However, the land
required for the probable silver or gold package, should initially be get
available. The guidelines for the Bronze, silver and gold package will be
issued separately.
Recurring Expenditure :- The Taluka Sports Complex Committee
shall make efforts to create sources of income for maintenance of the
Taluka Sports Complex. Grant for an amount of Rs.3.00 lakhs per year
shall be admissible for maintenance thereof. (including pay and
allowances)
3. Sports Facilities :- The general facilities to be provided
under District Sports Complex have been mentioned in Appendix "B"
however, the approval of the State Level Sports Development Committee
shall be obtained for the Project Report to be prepared in this regard.
The general facilities to be provided under Divisional sports
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
complex have been mentioned in Appendix "C" appended hereto. Under
this scheme, it shall be necessary to have the general facilities viz.
Modern stadium/Indoor Hall/Synthetic 400 meters running track,
Olympics size Swimming pool with 10 lanes together with auditorium,
Indoor stadium together with auditorium etc. of international standard
on divisional level mentioned in Appendix "C", under one roof as far as
possible. However, as per the utility, the same may be obtained in various
parts of the city. The work of the Hockey Astroturf ground and also of
the shooting range shall be done in this divisional sport complex. The
sports facilities shall be made available so that it would become possible
to organize the international competitions. Under this Scheme,
Divisional sports complex having the sports material required for the
international competitions shall be set up.
For setting up of the District/Divisional Sports Complex, the
Sports Complex Committee shall be formed as mentioned in Appendix
"D" appended hereto. The Project report in respect of the sports
facilities shall be got prepared by each of the Sport Complex Committee
and the approval thereto shall be obtained from the State Level Sports
Complex. General instructions are issued for setting up this
District/Divisional Sports Complex and the detailed guidelines in respect
thereof will be issued separately.
4. Planning of the sports facilities :- The planning of the
sports facilities shall be made in the State by the State Level Sports
Development Committee.
5. Selection of the land for sports complexes :- While making
selection of the land for the sports complexes, the important fact is that
the said facilities can be used conveniently by maximum number of
people especially by students/athletes and the said complexes should not
be at isolated places, that means the same should be convenient for the
citizens/persons concerned from the view point of their
transportation/contact/management. For this purpose, the sports
facilities herein must be available at one and the same place, however, if
the required large place is not available at one and the same place or if a
facility is available then, there shall not be objection for having the sports
facilities at various places. Similarly, the Project Report shall be prepared
only after ascertaining the facts viz. as to for how many times, a
particular facility will be utilized and as to whether such kind of sports
facility is already available and by considering the utility thereof and as to
whether it is necessary to have the said facility under this Scheme.
Similarly considering the popularity of the sports in the concerned area
and subject to the prescribed grant, any new facility will be availed
besides the approved facility or the improvement will be made in the
approved facilities. However, the Divisional District Sports complexes
shall be set up at the places of the Divisional and District Headquarters.
6. In the State, the Divisional Sports Complex for Konkan Division
shall be set up in Thane / Navi Mumbai and the Divisional Sports
Complexes having facilities of international standard shall be set up in
each Revenue Divisions viz. Nashik, Pune, Aurangabad, Nagpur and
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Amaravati. Further, additional Divisional Sports Complex for the City
of Mumbai shall be set up in Mumbai City and Mumbai Suburban area.
FUND: A maximum fund of total sum of Rs.4.00 Crores will be
made available under the District Sports Complex Scheme. Under this
Scheme, a grant of Rs.4.00 Crores shall be admissible for each District
Sports Complex. The fund that has been made available for the District
Sports Complex approved earlier will be deducted from the total sum of
Rs.4.00 Crores and the balance fund will be made available as per the
requirement. If the works under construction have got stalled for want
of fund, the same can be completed from this fund. However, a
separate proposal in this regard will have to be submitted to the State
Sports Development Committee for seeking its approval thereto.
Similarly, if no sports facility has been availed heretofore, proposals
afresh can be submitted for the same.
A total fund up to Rs. 16.00 Crores, in the form of a Grant, will
be made available for the Divisional Sports Complex wherein a Revenue
Division-wise fund will be made available for the Divisional Sports
Complexes at Nagpur, Aurangabad, Amaravati, Pune, Nashik, Konkan
(Navi Mumbai and Thane) and Mumbai.
Recurring Expenditure: For the expenditure to be incurred on
maintenance of the District Sports Complex, a fund to the tune of
Rs.10.00 Lacs for first year, of Rs. 7.50 Lac for the second year and of Rs.
5.00 Lacs for third year is sanctioned. (Including Pay and allowances).
For the maintenance of the Divisional Sports Complex, an
annual grant of sum of Rs.15.00 Lac for the first year, Rs.12.50 Lakhs for
second year and Rs.10.00 Lac for third year is proposed. (Including Pay
and Allowances). In order to meet the maintenance expenditure, the
Sports Complex Committee shall, since the beginning, make efforts to
create its own source of income and shall become self-sufficient.
7. PRIVATE INVESTMENT: Considering the fact that a huge
amount of development fund is required to make available this basic
infrastructure for development of sports, if a private investment is
sought, the basic infrastructure for development of sports on a large scale
than the proposed scheme could be made available. If it is possible to
undertake the projects of setting up of sports complexes through the
commercial purpose or through private investment in such a manner,
then such projects shall be undertaken subject to the provisions of the
Maharashtra Infrastructure Development and Support Act. Detailed
orders in this regard are issued separately.
8. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY: The Committees like Taluka Sports
Complex Committee for Taluka Sports Complex, District Sports
Complex Committee for District Sports Complex and Divisional Sports
Complex Committee for Divisional Sports Complex, as mentioned in
Appendix-One shall be set up for implementation of the projects. As
regards the urban areas, the orders for setting up of the Committees will
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
be issued separately. The Guidelines for functioning of the Committees
will be issued separately.
For setting up the Divisional and District Sports Complexes, the
respective Committees can get the works of supervision of the
construction and other works carried out either through the Public
Works Department, Private Architect or by dividing the same between
both of them. For that purpose, 4% E.T.P. amount can be divided and
paid between both of them. The guidelines in this regard will be issued
by the State level Sports Development Committee. Similarly, only one
colour scheme for all Divisional and District Sports Complex like the
one for Taluka Sports Complex will be fixed by the State Level Sports
Development Committee.
9) PHASES OF GRANT FOR SPORTS COMPLEXES: The grant of
Rs.25.00 Lac admissible for the Taluka Sports Complex will be made
available in lumpsum together with the approval for the proposal. For
preparing the project reports in respect of District Sports Complex and
Divisional Sports Complex, an amount of Rs.5.00 Lac for District Sports
Complex and Rs.10.00 Lac for Divisional Sports Complex will be made
available for meeting the preliminary expenditure after the land therefor
is determined / made available. Further, the grant of Rs.4.00 Crores and
Rs.16.00 Crores will be admissible for the District Sports Complex and
Divisional Sports Complex respectively and the said entire amount shall
be payable. The same will include the items mentioned in Appendix-1,
2 and 3 enclosed herewith. The fund to the extent of 20% of the total
cost will be made available along with granting of approval to the
proposal and thereafter, the remaining fund will be made available as per
the progress of construction work. The fund to be made available for the
Taluka Sports Complexes during the Financial Year 2002-2003 shall be
transferred to the District Sports Complex Committee for the District
concerned and thereafter, the said fund shall be transferred to the Taluka
Sports Complex Committee through the District Sports Complex
Committee.
The criterion for the method of releasing the fund for the
Divisional and District Sports Complexes will be issued separately.
10) OBJECTIVE AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES : These Centres shall
be people oriented. General students shall have entry in the said
complexes free of cost. Instead of providing facilities to the high-brow
and people from higher class of the society merely for Commercial
purpose, efforts shall be made to see that even ordinary people can make
use of the same. Entry to the play-grounds in the sports complexes shall
be kept free of cost for the students from Class-I to Class-VIII and
minimum monthly fee shall be charged for the students from the higher
standards. Schools and Colleges, Educational and other Institutions shall
be charged annual membership fee for use of play-grounds and no
facility shall be made available free of cost. Fee shall be charged for
Annual Sports / Annual functions. Appropriate fee shall be charged for
the facility of every indoor game. (This fee shall be determined by the
Managing Committee in consultation with the representative of the
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
association of every sport). The said Managing Committee shall prepare
a time-table for sports facility and for the competitions/training
programme to be held throughout the year. Besides the sports,
permission will be granted to make use of the ground and other premises
for commercial purpose for the days that will be specified by the
Government. The concerned Managing Committee shall be responsible
to maintain the Indoor Hall and the equipment therein. (The guidelines
in this regard will be issued separately).
11) The detailed instructions / Rules in this regard will be issued
separately. The expenditure to be incurred for this purpose shall be
defrayed from the provision made in the concerned financial year under
the account head mentioned hereinbelow:
(A) "2204 - Sports and Youth Services, 104 - Sports and Games,
Scheme under Five-Year Plan - Scheme under State Schemes (10)(02)
Sports Training Centre Establishment, 41 - Ancillary Grant, (2204 045
5) Demand No.N-2".
(B) "2004 - Sports and Youth Services, 104 - Sports and Games,
Scheme under Five-Year Plan - Scheme under State Schemes (16)(02) -
Setting up of Sports Complex, 41 - Ancillary Grant, (2204 0553)
Demand No. N-2".
12. This Government Resolution is issued with the concurrence of
the Finance Department received under its Unofficial Reference No.
302/03/Expenditure-14, dated 26.03.2003.
By Order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra.
(Pradeep S. Indulkar)
Under Secretary,
Government of Maharashtra."
(emphasis supplied)
63. As clearly seen from the aforesaid Government Resolution,
comprehensive provisions are made recognising the need to achieve the
objects of the 2001 sports policy of the State Government, with special
emphasis for a divisional sports complex at Thane - Navi Mumbai,
considering the importance of the location of these places. It is on such
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
backdrop, the land in question at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai came to be
earmarked for a Government Sports Complex.
64. It is also clear from the departmental note dated 22 June, 2007 on
record of the CIDCO, which is not in dispute, in which CIDCO had
clearly stated for providing land to the Government to establish Regional
Sports Complex in Navi Mumbai inter alia referring to the letter from
Mayor, as also a letter received from the "Deputy Director, Sports & Youth
Service," Mumbai Region dated 17 May, 2007. In such noting, it was
recorded that the Government vide order dated 24 February, 2003 had
approved a proposal to establish Regional Sports Complex on "Built
Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis", so as to provide for the sports
activities, ten in number, as set out therein. The contents of this office
submission is required to be noted which read thus:-
"CIDCO/SP (N)/ 22nd June, 2007.
Sub: Request for providing land to establish Regional Sports
Complex in Navi Mumbai.
Ref.: i) A letter from Mayor, NUMC to JT.M.D, CIDCO dated
1.06.07.
ii) Letter from Dy.Director, Sports & Youth Service,
Mumbai Region dated 17.05.2007 addressed to Mayor, NMMC
Vide above cited letter Mayor, NMMC requested Jt MD to
take necessary action for provision of land to establish Regional
Sports Complex in Navi Mumbai and attached the copy of letter
received by her from Dy Director Sports & Youth Service,
Mumbai Region. In the said letter of Dy Director Sports, it is
stated that Govt, vide order dated 24.02.2003 has approved a
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
proposal to establish Regional Sports Complex on *Built Operate
and Transfer (BOT) basis". Accordingly, it has sanctioned Rs.1600
Lakhs and also allowed to use some part of land for commercial
purpose which will help to compensate the cost of administration,
maintenance and repairs of sports complex. The said Regional
sports complex will include following sports activities:-
1. 400 Mt. runway and open auditorium.
2. Swimming pool of Olympic size (50 X 21 Mt,
diving pool, beginner's pool, filtration plant etc.)
3. Closed air conditioned auditorium of size (36 X 12
Mt with wooden / synthetic flooring)
4. Astroturf Hockey ground.
5. Grounds for various sports such as football,
handball, Kabbaddi, Kho-Kho, Basket ball court,
tennis court.
6. Shorting range.
7. Sports Hostel( Separately for Boys & Girls)
8. Gym (Health Club).
9. Sports material of international standards required
for various sports.
10. Squash court.
It is seen from the said letter that they have kept their
follow up with CIDCO to take land for sports complex and quoted
rate @ Rs. 1750/- per Sq.Mt in the letter. This shows that either
from marketing section or from SSO Section this proposal might
have been processed earlier. Therefore MM(I) /MM(III) and also
SSO need to examine their earlier correspondence if any made
with Dir. (Sports) Authority and submit consolidated proposal to
Jt.MD for his information and on-word discussion with Hon'ble
Mayor, NMMC.
As far as land allocation for Sports Complex is concerned, from
planning point of view following are the 4 locations shown in the
enclosed plan for ready reference.
Sr. No. Node Sector Area (in Ha)
1. Ghansoli 12 08 Ha
13 15 Ha
2. Airoli 19 a) 1.25 Ha
b) 1.25 Ha
Submitted please."
(emphasis supplied)
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
65. We may also observe that even the NMMC was of the considered
opinion that the land admeasuring 37 acres as reserved for Navi Mumbai
Sports Complex at Ghansoli was not sufficient and it would be necessary
that more land is made available to NMMC by CIDCO and utilized for
the purpose of setting up the municipal corporation sports complex. In
this regard, the Municipal Commissioner had addressed a letter to the
Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development Department dated 31
July, 2012 under the subject 'allotment of plots reserved by CIDCO for
Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Sports Complex and adjacent plots
to Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation for setting up state-of-the-art
Sports Complexes at Sector-14, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai'. It was
categorically recorded that area of 36.82 acres being offered was
insufficient and consolidated demand for additional land adjacent to the
sports complex reserved by CIDCO for Government of Maharashtra
Sports Complex admeasuring 28.13 acres and adjacent Plot-C, sector-12A
admeasuring 11.17 acres should be made available for setting up state-of-
art sports complexes and an integrated project plan should be prepared.
The said letter reads thus:-
" No. NMMC / Estate / 770/2012.
Date:- 31/07/2012
To,
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Hon'ble Additional Chief Secretary
Urban Development Department,
Mantralay, Mumbai-400032
Subject:- Regarding allotment of plots reserved by CIDCO
for Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Sports
Complex and adjacent Plots to Navi Mumbai
Municipal Corporation for setting up state-of-the-
art Sports Complexes at Sector-14, Ghansoli, Navi
Mumbai.
With reference to above subject and contest there off, in the
meeting organized by Hon. Guardian Minister, Thane District and
Hon. Mayor, on dt. 30/06/2012 for development of Sports
Activity, presentation was made by M/s. Shivaji Patil & Associates,
Architect appointed by Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation for
development of Sports Complex on plot admeasuring 36.82 acres
at Sector-14 Ghansoli, reserved by CIDCO for Sports Complex of
Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation.
With the said presentation, The Hon'ble Guardian Minister
Thane District pointed out that for setting up state-of-the-art
Spoils Complexes, area of 36.82 acres is insufficient and
consolidated demand for additional land adjacent to the sports
complex, reserved by CIDCO for Government of Maharashtra
Sports Complex admeasuring 28.13 acres and adjacent Plot-C,
sector 12A admeasuring 11.17 acres, shall be made and thereafter
for setting up state-of-the-art Sports Complexes an integrated
Project Plan should be prepared.
The area of land reserved by CIDCO for Navi Mumbai
Municipal Sports Complex is 36.82acres. Comparison is drawn to
State and National level developed sports complexes i.e. Indira
Gandhi Sports Complex, New Delhi has an area of 102 acres and
the Sports Complex at Baner, Pune has' an area of 128 acres.
Compared to the above two sports complexes, the area of
land reserved for the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Sports
Complex is very less and insufficient. Also in Navi Mumbai,
Mumbai and Thane Municipal Corporation area, there is no up-to-
date sports complex available.
Considering the said facts, it is proposed to provide the
following facilities in the said sports complex.
1. A parking lot with a capacity of 2500 for car parking
2. Outdoor stadium ground with 16500 seating capacity.
3. Air-conditioned Indoor Stadium with 12000 seating
capacity.
4. Indoor Olympic size swimming pool 50.0 M. X 25.0 M.
With 1000 seating capacity ( 20.0 M. X 25.0 M. Diving Pool, 20.0
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
M.X 20.0 M. Warm Up Pool.)
5. Basket ball court with 300 seating capacity.
6. Hockey stadium with 5000 seating capacity
7. 2 nos. Kho- Kho pitch having size 29.0 M x 16.0 M & 4
nos. kabbdi pitch having size 12.5 M x 10.0 M with the provision
for rest rooms and 300 seating capacity.
8. Tennis & Badminton Stadium - For final matches 2 nos. of
badminton pitches with 750 seating capacity and 2 nos. of
Badminton practice pitches. 1 No. of Tennis pitch for matches
with 750 seating capacity and 3 Nos. of Tennis practice pitches,
with the provision of waiting, changing room and food plaza.
9. Administration & accommodation - administrative office
complex, 150 rooms for accommodation, game facilities, table
tennis, snuffer, Chess, Carom, Cafeteria, rest room, waiting area
with toilet facility.
10. Large scale food court & Food Plaza:- close and semi open
dining, lounge area, toilet & refreshment facilities, take away
counter, with fully equipped kitchen, cold storage & storage.
Apart from above, Municipal Corporation intends to
develop a state-of-the-art sports complex with a fully equipped
cricket stadium with a capacity of 40,000 seats and a capacity of
2,000 vehicles. Area available for Sports Complex in the
jurisdiction Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation, i.e. 28.13 acres
of Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex and adjoining area
of 11.67 acres of plot-C, if it is made available to Navi Mumbai
Municipal Corporation, a total area of 76.62 acres will be available
for the construction of up-to-date and complete sports complex.
However, for the purpose of setting up an up-to-date and
complete sports complex in the Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation area, the Government of Maharashtra is requested to
transfer the land reserved for the Sports Complex and the vacant
plots adjacent to it to the Municipal Corporation.
Accompanied by: - Revised site map with area description letter,
Yours Faithfully,
Commissioner
Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation"
(emphasis supplied)
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
66. The petitioner has placed on record plans/maps issued by CIDCO
from time to time (Exhibit-K, page 86) which indicated clear demarcation
of Sector 12 for "Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex" of 8
hectares and Sector 13 for Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Sports
Complex. However, it appears that later on as the CIDCO was of the
opinion that the State Government was not responding, it decided to issue
the tender in question by sub-dividing the plots in Sector 12A at Ghansoli
so as to cull out plot no.4 to be allotted. However, in the "plan" which was
published as annexed to the tender, CIDCO nonetheless showed part of
the land earmarked for Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex,
however, without specifying the area so earmarked. There are four plots
which are earmarked in Sector 12, which were tendered for the purpose of
residential-cum-commercial use.
67. It also appears that after the formation of Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation, considering the fact that the NMMC would assume legal
status as a planning authority in regard to the large plot of Navi Mumbai
area, there was an endeavour on the part of the NMMC to utilize lands
which in fact, according to CIDCO, were vested with the CIDCO. There
was some confrontation between these two authorities who considered
themselves as planning authorities for Navi Mumbai area. The State
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government was required to intervene by issuing directions under Section
154 permitting the CIDCO to utilize / allot lands which stood vested with
the CIDCO and which according to CIDCO, had remained undeveloped
and not part of the lands which, in fact, were handed over to the NMMC
on which NMMC would exercise jurisdiction. In its endeavour, the
NMMC had sought an approval for preparation of a development plan or
modification of the plan which was prepared by CIDCO which was not in
fact a development plan, but a broad zoning, however, such request of the
NMMC was not accepted by the State Government. The legal
controversy, however, was put to rest by this Court in the decision of
Nishant Karsan Bhagat vs. The City and Industrial Development
Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. & Ors. (supra), when it was held that the
plots which the CIDCO had tendered at the relevant time (not qua the
Ghansoli node) could be allotted by CIDCO, being undeveloped lands,
still considered to be vested in CIDCO. However, the fact remains that
the controversy in the present case is quite different than what had fell for
consideration of the Court in such case.
68. We may thus observe that the aforesaid position in regard to the
State's policy to encourage sports and provide overall sports facilities is not
in dispute. In pursuance of such policy of the State Government, it is not
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
in dispute that the State Government had approached the CIDCO some
time in the year 2003 through the Directorate of Sports requesting
CIDCO for earmarking land at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai to be utilized for
construction of a Government Sports Complex. It is in pursuance of such
request as made by the State Government, the CIDCO since 2003 had
earmarked the land admeasuring about 20 acres at Ghansoli to be utilized
for the purpose of Government Sports Complex. The correspondence in
that regard is referred by us in the aforesaid paragraphs. It also appears to
be not in dispute that at all material times, the land earmarked by the
CIDCO for Government Sports Complex formed a contiguous part of the
whole "layout" of which part of the land namely admeasuring 41 acres was
to be also reserved for the NMMC to construct its sports complex. The
intention was always to develop these two sports complexes as integrated
complexes, as clearly seen from letter of NMMC dated 31 July 2012
(supra) addressed by the Municipal Commissioner to the Additional Chief
Secretary, Urban Development Department.
69. Thus, the respective lands for State Government and NMMC were
earmarked by CIDCO. The land earmarked for NMMC has now been
allotted by the CIDCO to the NMMC and which would now be used to
develop the NMMC Sports Complex. However, what cannot be forgotten
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
is that the adjoining land had always remained "earmarked" to be allotted
to the Government of Maharashtra, to be developed as Government
Sports Complex, so as to create a contiguous and integrated sports
complex. Such decision had always prevailed and was to be implemented
in the matter it was conceived in the year 2003.
70. In our opinion, the earmarking of such land by CIDCO to be
utilized by NMMC for its sports complex as also the land being earmarked
for the Government Sports Complex to be utilized by the State
Government, which in fact was acted upon by the CIDCO, cannot be said
to be something less than actual reserving of such land for the benefit of
NMMC and the State Government, for these lands to be utilized for
setting up the respective sports complexes. Such was the appropriate
decision taken by the CIDCO within its powers as a new town
development authority. CIDCO was fully within its authority to so
demarcate nay reserve the land for public purpose as these were lands
belonging to the State Government, however, vested with the CIDCO as a
new town development authority, for the purpose of utilization and
development as per the policies of the State Government. CIDCO's
affidavit on this would throw more light.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
71. CIDCO in its reply affidavit has clearly stated that it is a "State
Government Company", share capital of which is subscribed exclusively by
the Government of Maharashtra. It has stated that CIDCO was
constituted as a "New Town Development Authority", by the Government
of Maharashtra, under the provisions of the MRTP Act. CIDCO has also
categorically stated that the entire land as made available for its disposal, as
new town development authority is owned by the Government of
Maharashtra. It is on such understanding of the legal position, which the
MRTP Act would recognize, inter se between the State Government and
the CIDCO, it appears that the land at Ghansoli came to be earmarked for
both such sports complexes. Apart from this insofar as the lands which
had remained undeveloped and which stood vested in the CIDCO,
notwithstanding the formation/constitution of the NMMC (municipal
corporation for the Navi Mumbai) CIDCO's authority to deal and dispose
of such undeveloped lands was recognized by this Court [see Nishant
Karsan Bhagat vs. The City and Industrial Development Corporation of
Maharashtra Ltd. & Ors. (supra)].
72. However, as noted above, the present proceedings are required to be
considered from a different perspective. The proceedings in our opinion
cannot be adversarial qua the principal cause espoused by the petitioner
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
against the State Government and the CIDCO, as what is sought to be
espoused by the petitioner is purely a public interest for a government
sports complex to be developed and made available to the public at large,
which is also recognized by the State Government, CIDCO and NMMC at
all relevant times, till the impugned decision dated 26 March, 2021was
taken by the State Government to abandon the Navi Mumbai land and
shift the Government Sports Complex in a remote rural area at Nanore in
Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad, altogether a different district.
73. We may observe that in the contemporary times and more
particularly considering the meager number of government sports facilities
being provided by the Government to the public at large, the Government
had taken a conscious decision under its sports policy to provide sports
facilities by utilizing Ghansoli land in Navi Mumbai (the land in
question), so as to have a sports complex of an international standard
adjoining to NMMC Sports Complex. We are of the clear opinion that the
petitioner is not incorrect when it contends that the citizens are being
deprived of sports complex being provided by the Government in view of
the Government purporting to give up its decision to use the earmarked
land at Ghansoli.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
74. On the above conspectus, we are next required to examine as to
whether the decision of the State Government as contained in the
impugned Government Resolution dated 26 March, 2021 so as to give up
the land at Ghansoli thereby shifting the Government of Maharashtra
Sports Complex to a far off place at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon,
District Raigad is legal and valid. To appreciate the reasons which
weighed with the State Government to take such decision, and to us
appearing to be quite astonishing, it would be necessary to extract the
contents of Government Resolution dated 26 March, 2021, which reads
thus:
"(Official Translation of a photocopy of a GOVERNMENT
RESOLUTION, printed in Marathi).
Exhibit - "U"
Regarding granting
Administrative Approval for
setting up Divisional Sports
Complex for Konkan Division at
Village - Nanore, Taluka -
Mangaon, District - Raigad
instead of at Navi Mumbai.
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA
School Education and Sports Department,
Government Resolution No. D.S.C.-1921 / M. No. 92 /S. Y. S.-1
Madam Cama Road, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk,
Mantralaya Annexe, Mumbai - 400 032.
Date: 26th March, 2021.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Read:
1) Government Resolution bearing No. N. S. P. - 2003 / M.
No.11 / S. Y. S.-1, dated 26 th March, 2003, issued by the
Department of Social Justice, Cultural Affairs, Sports and Special
Assistance.
2) Government Resolution No. N. S. P. - 2009 / (M. No.
25/09) / S.Y.S. -1, dated 21 st March, 2009, issued by the School
Education and Sports Department.
3) Decision taken in the meeting of the State Sports
Development Committee dated 09th March, 2021 held under the
chairmanship of the Hon'ble Minister (Sports and Youth Welfare).
PREFACE :
Under the Sports Policy, 2001 of the State of Maharashtra,
by the Government Resolution dated 26th March, 2003, referred to
at Sr. No.1 hereinabove, approval has been granted to set up
Taluka Sports Complex (Bronze Package, Silver Package and Gold
Package as per the sports facilities), District Sports Complex (at
least of National level and of International level in additional
form) and Divisional Sports Complex (International level) for
making available various sports facilities at all places in the State
for creating sports facilities under the Maharashtra Sports
Infrastructure Development Plan. As per the said approval, one
Taluka Sports Complex in each Taluka, one District Sports
Complex in each District and one Divisional Sports Complex in
each Revenue Division (including Kolhapur and Latur Division)
will be set up in the State. In the Government Resolution dated
26th March, 2003, referred to at Sr. No.1 hereinabove, it has
categorically been mentioned that one Divisional Sports Complex
for the City of Mumbai and the Divisional Sports Complex for
Konkan Division shall be set up in Mumbai, Navi Mumbai. A
Court Case is going on in respect of the plot of land proposed for
the Divisional Sports Complex to be set up in Navi Mumbai.
Moreover, as the land, sufficient for a sports complex, is not
available in the Navi Mumbai area, the issue of setting up the
Divisional Sports Complex for Konkan Division at Village -
Nanore, Taluka - Mangaon, District - Raigad instead of at Navi
Mumbai was under consideration of the Government.
GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION :
A Government Land admeasuring 10.00 Hectares (24
Acres) from Survey No. 130/0, at Village - Nanore, Taluka -
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Mangaon, District - Raigad has been made available for setting up
a Divisional Sports Complex for Konkan Division and the said
land has been transferred to the name of the Executive Committee,
Divisional Sports Complex, Mumbai Division. Taking into
consideration this fact, the approval of the Government is granted
to set up the proposed Divisional Sports Complex for the Konkan
Division at Village - Nanore, Taluka - Mangaon, District - Raigad
instead of at Navi Mumbai.
2) For setting up the Divisional Sports Complex for Konkan
Division at Mangaon, District - Raigad, an estimate of the amount
of Rs.8344.16 Lacs (in words - Rupees Eighty Three Crores, Forty
Four Lacs, Sixteen Thousand only) and plans in respect thereof
have been submitted and approval thereto is granted as per the
decision of the State Sports Committee, subject to the limit of
grant for the Divisional Sports Complex prescribed under the
Government Resolution referred to at Sr. No.2 hereinabove.
3) As per the said estimate, the Divisional Sports Complex will
have the facilities viz. 400-meter Synthetic Running Track, Foot
Ball Ground, Athletics Pavilion Building, Hockey Ground along
with changing room, Basket Ball, Volley Ball Courts, Kho-Kho,
Kabaddi Grounds, Tennis Court, Changing Room, Outdoor
Games, Internal Roads, Indoor Hall, Swimming Pool, Diving Pool,
Protection Wall, Boys-Girls Hostel, Rain Water Harvesting and
Bore Well, Filtration Plant, Swimming and Diving Pool, 'Material
Testing and Royalty Charge', 'G.S.T.', Electrification, Water
arrangement, levelling of sports ground and other items / facilities.
4) The expenditure to be incurred on this account shall be
defrayed from the provision sanctioned for the current and also for
the subsequent financial year under the Account Head viz.
"Demand No. E-3, Major Account Head 2204, Sports and Youth
Service, 104, Sports and Games, (16)(02) Setting up Sports
Complex, (2204 1827), 31, Ancillary Grants (Non Salary)". The
orders for disbursement of funds for this purpose will be issued
separately.
5) For this purpose, the Accounts Officer, Sports and Youth
Service, Pune and the Commissioner, Sports and Youth Service,
Maharashtra State, Pune are declared as the Drawing and
Disbursing Officer and the Controlling Officer, respectively.
6) The State Sports Development Committee under the
Chairmanship of the Hon'ble Minister (Sports) has been set up as
provided in the Government Resolution bearing No. N. S. P. -
2003 / M. No. 11 / S. Y. S. - 1, dated 26 th March, 2003, issued by
the Department of Social Justice, Cultural Affairs, Sports and
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Special Assistance. The State Sports Development Committee has
been given the administrative and financial powers of the Planning
Department and the Finance Department. This Government
Resolution is issued as per the decision taken in the meeting of the
State Sports Development Committee dated 09th March, 2021,
held under the Chairmanship of the Hon'ble Minister (Sports) and
with the approval of the Government.
7) This Government Resolution is made available on the
Web-site www.maharashtra.gov.in of the Government of
Maharashtra and its Code Number is 202103261313580521. This
Order (Government Resolution) is authenticated by digital
signature and is issued.
By order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra.
Swati Madhukar (S. M. Nanal)
Nanal Deputy Secretary,
Government of Maharashtra."
(emphasis supplied)
75. A bare reading of the aforesaid Government Resolution would
demonstrate palpably untenable reasons, apparent from its contents, when
it records that "a Court case is going on in respect of the plot of land
proposed for the Divisional Sports Complex to be set up at Navi Mumbai,"
being one of the reasons. The Court case is none other than the present
proceedings. Can this at all be the reason for the State Government to take
a decision and that too when monumental public interest is involved,
namely, of development of international sports facilities which would cater
to two big cities, like, Mumbai and Navi Mumbai and the adjoining areas
within the 'Mumbai Metropolitan Region' so as to relinquish setting up of
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
such Government sports complex at Ghansoli. In our opinion, such
reasons are clearly an eye wash and appear to have been taken patently on
extraneous considerations. The second reason as provided in the said GR,
is to the effect that sufficient land "for a sports complex" is not available in
Navi Mumbai area, also appears to be a new "eureka" and clearly not a
realistic/genuine reason, as the facts and circumstances prevailing from
long time since 2003 would demonstrate. This clearly appears to be a new
discovery that for the first time in the year 2021, such an opinion was
formed that the land at Navi Mumbai would not be sufficient. As to how
such opinion is formed, in no manner whatsoever is spelt out, either in the
said GR or any other material placed on record on behalf of the State
Government. This apart, as to what is the logic in now having the sports
complex in a remote area 115 kms. away from Navi Mumbai also cannot
be comprehended. In such context, we really wonder as to how any
sanctity can be attributed in shifting the sports complex to such remote
area at Mangaon again not in a vast area but land admeasuring 24 acres, so
as to substitute the State Government's well considered decision to locate
this Government sports complex at Ghansoli in Navi Mumbai.
76. In the affidavit filed on behalf of CIDCO of Mr. Faiyaz Ahmed
Khan, Manager Town Services-1, it is clearly set out that the land in
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
question was earmarked as 'Social Facility (Government of Maharashtra
Sports Complex). The affidavit also clearly states that the demand of
Government of Maharashtra, Sports department was that the said land
earmarked for Government sports complex was to be allotted free of cost
and that the CIDCO had informed the District Sports Officer to obtain
specific orders from the Government in case the said land for the District
Sports Complex is to be handed over free of cost, however, as the District
Sports officer failed to obtain such orders/directives from the Government.
We have quoted the extract of affidavit in paragraph no. 26 hereinabove.
The affidavit of CIDCO thus indicates that it was merely a formality which
was required to be observed for the Government to direct CIDCO with
the authority and powers at its command under the MRTP Act, to allot
the land free of cost for such public purpose and for which the land at all
material times was reserved as "Social Facility (Government of India sports
complex)", and now proposed to be utilized for 'Future development' as
stated by CIDCO in its affidavit. In any event, we find that it is
unconscionable for CIDCO to have taken into consideration market price,
as the basis for allotment of land to the State Government, as necessarily
even under the Navi Mumbai Disposal of Lands (Amendment)
Regulations, 2008 (for short "2008 Regulations") framed by CIDCO, it
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
was within the powers of the CIDCO as conferred under Section 159 read
with Section 113 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act,
that the land be allotted to the State Government for public purpose at a
specified rate of lease premium as Regulation 4(i) would postulate.
Regulation 4(i) of 2008 Regulation reads thus:
"4. Manner of disposal of plots - The Corporation shall dispose
off plots by inviting public tenders or by public auction, except for
the following categories :
(i) to the Central Government/State Government and
their Undertakings, to the Local Bodies and to any
Government Autonomous Body constituted under any Act
for any public purpose, by considering individual
applications at specified rate of lease premium."
77. Even if Regulation 4 of the 2008 Regulations (supra) is to be
applied, this would not mean that the State Government stands divested of
its authority and power to seek or have an allotment of such land free of
cost from CIDCO. Even assuming such regulations are required to be
applied for allotment of land at the hands of CIDCO for such public
purpose, however, with the powers the State Government wields under the
MRTP Act read with the 2008 Regulations, in the present circumstances,
it was possible for the State Government to get such land allotted to it
either free of cost or at the specified premium. However, this certainly
cannot be the prevailing market rate. In these circumstances, CIDCO
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
ought not to have resorted to remove the earmarking of the plot as a
"Social Facility (Government of Maharashtra Sports Complex)" to "Future
Development", which is nothing but commercial exploitation of the land
causing a serious prejudice to not only the present but future rights of the
citizens who are residents of the urban agglomeration, popularly called as
'Mumbai Metropolitan Region' to have free of cost sports facilities. In the
circumstances in hand, we wonder as to whether those in the control of
planning and development of cities and towns are at all conscious, that the
rights of the future generation also need to be protected and accounted for.
We are clearly of the opinion that these are fundamental rights which are
guaranteed to the citizens for all times to come, to have appropriate and
better living conditions which would include the State and the planning
authorities providing open spaces, gardens, playgrounds which would
include government sports complexes (not private sports
facilities/complexes). On such issues, a vision and thought for the
common man is of utmost necessity, before any decision is taken in
concretization of open spaces and government lands which are acquired
for public purposes. There would be a gross failure on the part of the
government and other public bodies similarly placed if such vital issues are
overlooked and/or intentionally sought to be buried in creating urban
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
jungles. In the absence of these issues being seriously considered, it would
result into a situation of grave injustice and taking away the fundamental
rights of the citizens not only in praesenti but also for the future. If we do
not have a foresight, concern and care for the future rights of the citizens,
and from all possible perspectives, we are abdicating the Constitutional
principles which recognizes an overall development of an individual,
which is part of right to livelihood as guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution and as interpreted in its various dimensions, in catena of
judgments of the Supreme Court.
78. Apart from what has been stated hereinabove, we may also refer to
the provisions of Section 118 of the MRTP Act, which provides for
"Disposal of land by Development Authority", [namely, CIDCO in the
present context, as "Development Authority" is defined under section 2(8)
to mean a "New Town Development Authority" constituted or declared
under section 113 of the MRTP Act]. Section 118 recognizes the powers
of the State Government in regard to disposal of land. It would be
necessary to note the said provisions, which reads thus:
"118. Disposal of land by Development Authority.
(1) Subject to any directions given by the State Government
under this Act, a Development Authority may dispose of any
land acquired by it or vesting in it to such persons, in such
manner, and subject to such terms or conditions as they
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
consider expedient for securing the development of the new
town in accordance with proposals approved by the State
Government under this Act:
Provided that, a Development Authority shall not have
power, except with the consent of the State Government, to sell
any land or to grant a lease of any land for a term of more than
ninety-nine years, and the State Government shall not consent
to any such disposal of land unless it is satisfied that there are
exceptional circumstances which render the disposal of the land
in that manner expedient.
(2) The powers of a Development Authority with respect to
the disposal of land acquired for it for the purposes of this Act
shall be so exercised as to secure, so far as practicable, that
persons who were living or carrying on business, or other
activities on land so acquired shall, if they desire to obtain a plot
or accommodation [on land belonging to, or vesting in, the
Development Authority and are willing to Comply with any
requirements of the Development Authority as to its
development and use, have an opportunity to obtain a plot or
accommodation suitable to their reasonable requirements on
terms settled with due regard to the price at which any such and
has been acquired from them.
(3) Nothing in this Act shall be constructed as enabling a
Development Authority to dispose of land by way of gift,
mortgage or charge, but subject as aforesaid, references in this
Act to the disposal of land shall be construed as reference to the
disposal thereof in any manner, whether by way of sale,
exchange or lease by the creation of any casement, right or
privilege or otherwise."
(emphasis supplied)
79. On a plain reading of the aforesaid provision, the Development
Authority would be under an obligation to dispose of the lands subject to
any directions given by the State Government under the MRTP Act and in
such manner and subject to such terms or conditions for securing the
development of the new town in accordance with proposals approved by
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
the State Government under the MRTP Act. Further the Development
authority shall not have any power, except with the consent of the State
Government to sell, lease any land for a period of more than 99 years
under any exceptional circumstances agreed by the State Government.
Thus it is not the case that the CIDCO could exercise authority without
the express approval of the State Government to change the
earmarking/designation of the said land and decide to allot the same to
private parties by inviting bids. Such action on the part of CIDCO was in
clear breach of the provisions of Section 118 of the MRTP Act, for the
reason that prior to August 2016, there was no decision of the State
Government as communicated to the CIDCO to cancel the earmarking of
the land reserved for the Government Sports Complex.
80. It doesn't need a second thought that a sports complex needs to be
available as a facility close to urban areas, which is surrounded by large
population comprising of children and youth, who would take the benefit
of sports facilities being made available by the Government. It is this large
population comprising of common persons, who would take and receive
the ultimate benefit of the sports facilities, when such facilities are at a
reachable distance. We say so, as the population of Mumbai is about 2
crores and population of the adjoining urban centres/cities like Navi
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Mumbai, Thane, Kalyan-Dombivli, Vasai-Virar and Bhivandi would
collectively be at an estimate of about 7 to 10 crore, out of which Navi
Mumbai itself being about 2 crores. These are all areas which would stand
benefited by such Government sports facilities. When the Government
thinks about sports facilities to be created in a Government Sports
Complex, it thinks of a common man, that is a man with limited means
who is not so advantaged like the persons belonging to the elite class who
can have sports facilities in high profile and costly clubs and gymkhanas.
Thus, it was most illogical for the State Government to take a decision to
not have a Government sports complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai and
shift the same to Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad.
81. It also appears that the land allotted at village Nanore has already
been used as a taluka sports complex since many years. It is impossible
that the rural facility being planned by the State can provide benefit to
such large number of children and youth, who are available in the urban
areas and who would be desirous to have the sports facilities, not too far
from their residence.
82. This apart, from the reasons as purportedly furnished by the State
Government, to now move out the Government sports complex from
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai to a remote area, in our opinion, is wholly an
arbitrary decision of the State Government. Such decision is not taken in
the interest of the Sports department and/or on appropriate consultation
with the sports department which is apparent from the contradicting
stands taken by the urban development department and the sports
department. In such context, two significant aspects which have come on
record, firstly, a very telling affidavit filed by the Sports Department which
has highlighted the basic consideration for setting up a sports complex. All
such essentials as highlighted in such affidavit were fully met by the
proposed Government sports complex at Ghansoli. In this context, and
for convenience, it is necessary to re-extract the relevant contents of the
affidavit, which read thus:
"5. I say that, the schedule C of the Government Resolution
dated 26.03.2003 prescribes that the proposed Divisional Sports
Complex shall include open auditorium along with synthetic
track of 400 mtrs. Gallery with seating arrangement for the
spectators, pavilion and administrative building, closed
swimming pool admeasuring 50 X 21 mtrs. along with filtration
plant, multipurpose hall with wooden/synthetic flooring,
Synthetic turf Hockey Ground, playground for football,
handball, kabbadi, kho-kho, basketball court, tennis court and
cinder track of 400 mtrs. Shooting and Archery track etc. The
equipments provided in such Divisional Sports Complexes shall
be of international standards.
7. I say that, the Government of Maharashtra thereafter, again
declared sports policy of Maharashtra in the year 2012. In the
said policy, the Government has decided to establish Greater
Mumbai Sports Authority which will look after the creation of
ward wise sport complexes and district sports complexes at
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Mumbai City, Mumbai Suburban and New Mumbai. Hereto
annexed and marked as Exhibit-A is the copy of the Sports
Policy, 2012.
11. I say that, as per the policy of the Government, the Sport
Complexes shall be selected from the places which are
convenient for transportation and administration for citizens and
persons concerned. The land at Sector No. 12 and 12A,
Ghansoli, Mumbai if developed as sports complex, it can fulfill
the need of growing populations in the area of Municipal
Corporations such as Thane, Navi Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivali,
Mira-Bhayander, Vasai-Virar, Ulhasnagar & Panvel and the same
is convenient for the transportation to Mumbai and Kokan
Division and also helpful for the International Sports Events
which will be hosted in future in the State of Maharashtra.
12. I say that, in view of above policy of Government, the land
which is subject matter of the present petition, can be developed
for the creation of Sports Complex of International Standard. I
say that for establishing various sports playground such as
Astroturf hockey ground, playground for football, handball,
kabbadi, kho-kho, basketball court, tennis court, shooting and
swimming pool etc. the authority required huge land to satisfy
the requirement of Sports Grounds of International Standards.
13. I say that, the development of the said plot for sports
complex of international standard is possible with Joint Venture
with New Mumbai Municipal Corporation and CIDCO.
However, there is no correspondence from the CIDCO regarding
allotment of plot at Sector No. 12 and 12A, Ghansoli, Navi
Mumbai to this Respondent which was earmarked for Regional
Sports Complex."
(emphasis supplied)
83. Secondly and most vitally, the Sports department had addressed a
letter dated 24 November, 2022 to the CIDCO requesting for handing
over of the Ghansoli land to the State Government although the area
appears to be inadvertently recorded as 42 Acres. The said letter reads
thus:
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
EXHIBIT - 'E'
DIRECTORATE OF SPORTS AND YOUTH SERVICES,
MAHARASHTRA STATE
Shivchhatrapati Sports Complex, Mahalunge-Balewadi, Pune-411045.
Email ID: [email protected] / [email protected]
Tele. No.: 020-29807445 / Website:sports.maharashtra.gov.in
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
No. Ghansoli N. M./Premises/S.C./2022-23/D-1/5038
Date: 23.11.2022/24.11.2022
To,
The Managing Director,
CIDCO, City and Industrial Development Corporation (Mah.) Ltd.,
2nd Floor, CIDCO Bhavan, CBD Belapur, Mumbai.
Sub: Regarding getting the land at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai, kept
reserved for the Sports Department of the Government of
Maharashtra .
In order to create basic sports infrastructure to make available
sports related facilities for the sportsmen and citizens and also to produce
international level sportsmen, a scheme to build Division/ District /
Taluka level Sports Complexes (Maharashtra Sports Infrastructure) is
underway in the State under the control of the Directorate of Sports and
Youth Services. A 42-Acre plot of land of CIDCO in Sector 12 and 12-A
at Ghansoli has been kept reserved for developing the sports facilities.
Taking into consideration the international status of the cities of
Mumbai and Navi Mumbai and also the huge population of the said
cities, availability of transport facilities, conducive atmosphere here for
sports and the international level sportsmen here, it is proposed to create
on the said land the international level sports facilities under the
Schemes of the Sports Department.
The FIFA U-17 Men's Football World Cup Competition, 2017,
Asian Women's Football Competition, 2021 and FIFA U-17 Women's
Football World Cup Competition, 2022 have been organised in Navi
Mumbai. Considering these facts, it is necessary to develop
supplementary facilities for organising the international level
competitions being organised from time to time. In order to organise
international level competitions, it is necessary to create on behalf of the
Government, an up-to-date high quality sports facilities, training and
sports science centers and also to provide fitness facilities for the citizens
and high quality sports facilities for the students, on the CIDCO land in
Navi Mumbai.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
In view of the same, the 42-Acre plot of land in Sector 12 and
12-A in Ghansoli under the control of CIDCO has been kept reserved
for the Sports Department. Therefore, it is requested to make available to
this Department the said plot of land as per the Government Rules and
as per the instructions issued by the Government, free of cost.
(Signature Illegible)
23.11.22.
[Dr. Suhas Divase]
Commissioner,
Sports and Youth Services,
Maharashtra State."
(emphasis supplied)
84. The aforesaid position being taken by the Sports department cannot
be overlooked. It thus clearly appears, that the decision to shift the
Government sports complex from Ghansoli to Nanore was taken at a
higher level and by stroke of a pen without any thought to the ground
realities which otherwise prevailed on record. Such decision is required to
be faulted on several aspects, as the record would bare out, some of which
in our opinion are:
1. It is unthinkable that the land at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai,
which is reserved for a Government Sports Complex, can remain
unutilized for 18 years.
2. It is further beyond one's imagination as to how and by which
standard this sports complex, which would cater to such large
population of the urban agglomeration and surrounded by cities like
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivli, Thane, Vasai-Virar, Ulhasnagar and
Navi Mumbai itself, can be shifted to a remote rural area about 115
kilometers away from the proposed Government Sports Complex,
being a place which has no comparable rail, road and air
connectivity, as Navi Mumbai would have.
3. Further, necessary infrastructure for sports persons and other
necessary activities in relation thereto are certainly not available,
which can be eminently found in these urban cities.
4. It is inconceivable that routine use of the sports facilities even
if provided at Village Nanore can be utilized by youth and children,
who are residents of these urban areas.
85. We may further observe that it is highly unimaginable that the State
Government in the affidavit filed by Shri. Aseemkumar Gupta, Principal
Secretary (Urban Development Department) as also recorded in the
minutes of the meeting, could take a stand that the pricing of the land
earmarked for Government Sports Complex as demanded by CIDCO
and/or payable to CIDCO would be Rs.2500 crores. It is also extremely
surprising for the Principal Secretary to not holistically consider the
issue of arbitrary allotment of part of the land earmarked for a
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government Sports Complex to respondent no.5 by CIDCO and attribute
importance at the level of the State Government to such allotment made in
favour of respondent no.5. This has become writ large from the minutes
of the meeting held under his Chairmanship on 24 July 2023 and 9
August 2023 in which it was recorded as under:-
"02. Considering all the facts and submission from
implementing Agencies, Petitioner and Respondents present in the
meeting, detailed discussion was carried out. As per directions
Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 14.7.2023 and alternatives
suggested, following conclusions were drawn :-
Sr. Point Conclusions
No.
1 The requirement for The Sports Complex being
an International proposed on the said land of
Sports Complex has CIDCO is of International level.
to be viewed at the Cost of the development is going
State level, and not as to be recovered by commercially
a divisional Sports exploiting 1/3rd of the land in
Complex. Instead of question. However, cost of the
purchasing land land itself has not been factored in
worth Rs.2500 the total cost of the project and
crores, it would be that is about 2500/- crores as per
better to utilize the CIDCO's expectation from sale.
funds for upgradation Thus effectively the proposal is of
of the facilities an International Stadium on the
provided in the 2/3rd of land for a cost of 2500/-
Sports Complex at crores for the public (whether it is
Balewadi in Pune. borne by N.M.M.C., State
Government of CIDCO, this is
public money). The issue then is
whether to have an International
Sports Complex at this cost and if
yes, then where in the State. It is
clear that State should decide as a
policy about various levels of
Sports Complexes - from city to
district to division to state to
national to International levels
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
and various right locations for
these. State must also, as a policy,
decide total amount of public
money that may be allocated to
these complexes. Indirectly by
asking CIDCO to part away with
the land without any
compensation for the project
inherently means that an
International level Sports
Complex is desired by a city at the
cost of 2500/- crores without any
deliberations and policy at the
State level. City has a duty to
make a city level sports complexes
of required number to its citizens
but may also aspire to have higher
level of Sports Complexes as it
adds to city's stature and
attraction, while adding facilities
for its own citizens of higher
standard. This however cannot be
at a cost of some other
Organization. Thus N.M.M.C.
must decide whether it wishes to
have an International standard of
Sports Complex at the cost of
2500/- crores and if yes, then it
must make value of the land
available to CIDCO. If N.M.M.C.
does not want to take up cost fully
of the land it may request State
Government for the funds and
State Government (Sports
Department) may decide on the
basis of its policy. CIDCO has
already made available spaces for
sports as per the norms (and
more) and also the 14.5 Ha of
land just adjacent to the said land
is handed over to N.M.M.C. for
Sport Complex thus cannot be
asked to transfer this land free of
cost to N.M.M.C. for the sports
complex. If N.M.M.C. does not
show interest in purchase of land
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
at market value from CIDCO in a
reasonable time frame, CIDCO
should be allowed to proceed with
its own plan.
5 about his utilization of the plot, third party
grievances, to which rights already created towards
it was explained by M/s. Progressive Group must be
the representative of respected. Thus CIDCO should
M/s. Progressive relocate/ realign their plot, if
Group that they have necessary, as per mutual consent
paid the full amount with Respondent No.5 only, so
for the plot allotted to that whatever is the final use to
them in 2016-17 which the land is put to, is not
itself and are unable affected adversely by location of
to take their project this plot. Representatives of
further owing to the Progressive Group agreed to the
matter being suggestion.
subjudice before the Thus it was decided that
Hon'ble High Court CIDCO would realign or relocate
since 2019. The delay on the same road in sector-12,
in taking up the Ghansoli free from any
construction shall reservation of proposed
attract payment N.M.M.C. draft DP reservation
additional of Lease Plan, Encroachment, CRZ,
Premium to CIDCO, Wetland, Mangroves and Forest
as per conditions of Reservation etc. and should not
the Agreement. He come in purview of section 46 of
further stated that M.R.T.P. Act to grant C.C. after
they are not averse to realign or relocate.
the relocation of the Issue of authority to put
plot in the same reservation by N.M.M.C. on
sector along the same undeveloped ownership lands of
road. CIDCO was discussed in detail.
There should be no ambiguity
about the authority of various
Organizations like N.M.M.C. and
CIDCO about putting and
developing reservations on various
lands in CIDCO area. This should
be done on priority by Urban
Development Department at the
earliest.
(emphasis supplied)
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
86. What is evident from the aforesaid minutes of the meeting is that
there is no basis spelt out in law or otherwise as to how CIDCO expected
that the cost of the said land to be allotted to the State Government is
being valued at Rs.2500 crores, also there being no break up of such cost.
Secondly, CIDCO itself has not placed anything on record to show that it
had demanded an unconscionable amount of Rs.2500 crores from the
State Government for the plot of land admeasuring 20 acres when CIDCO
has allotted 36 acres of land to NMMC at an amount of Rs.22.17 crores, as
set out in the allotment letter dated 19 January 2017. It is also surprising
to see the camouflage of the burden of Rs.2500 Crores being shifted on
the NMMC. It appears to be clearly a manipulation and twisting of
genuine facts being presented in the aforesaid minutes. The minutes,
however, do not appear to reflect the correct position on record and the
intention in referring to such huge amounts to be the price of the plot also
does not appear to be a well considered exercise.
87. It is thus surprising that if under the earmarking pattern as followed
by CIDCO, if the CIDCO can allot to NMMC 36 acres of land at a lease
premium of Rs.22,17,57,584/-, then as to why despite clear provisions of
Regulation 4 read with Section 118 of the MRTP Act, CIDCO would
demand such unconscionable amount of Rs. 2500 crores from the State
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government. In this context, it would not be out of place to observe that
there has to be a sense of proportion in the pricing of these lands, the
nature of which is not different. This for the reason that the CIDCO in
allotting 36 acres of land recovers a lease premium of Rs.22,17,57,584/-
(i.e. Rs. 22.17 cores) from NMMC, then by what standard for merely 20
acres of land an amount of Rs.2500 crores, is being demanded from the
State Government. Such amount would be at what enhanced percentage of
the price at which such adjoining land was allotted to the NMMC, is itself
a puzzle. The CIDCO and the State Government have miserably failed to
divulge and justify anything in this regard. We are, therefore, in complete
agreement with the petitioner when it states that the high officials of the
State Government have created this edifice of a "high pricing", without any
basis, to mislead the Court by quoting the price of the CIDCO plot at
Rs.2500 crores. Even assuming that such cost of Rs.2500 crores is
considered to be a project cost (when it is not so seen from the minutes of
the meeting, as also not demanded so by the CIDCO), even then such
astronomical amount being suddenly thrown on the record of the
proceedings, is unacceptable. The suggestions of the Court at the interim
stage that the issue needs to be resolved, is utilized to create such
untenable material. To our mind, looking at the record, it appears to be a
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
false defence that has been taken on the part of the Urban Development
Department and with an implicit, non-corrective approach of the CIDCO
in this behalf. It was the boundened duty of the CIDCO to correct the
State Government if the figure of Rs.2500 crores as taken by the Principal
Secretary, Urban Development Department, was not the amount actually
demanded by CIDCO, (in our opinion it could not have been demanded,
when there is nothing on record to this effect), no steps were taken by the
CIDCO to correct such infirmity and/or should we say a blunder the State
Government had attempted to place before the Court. Such senior
officials present in the meetings held on 25 July, 2023 and 9 August, 2023
have neither risen to the expectation of the public at large in taking a
decision in public interest, much less of the Court. It is a sorry state of
affairs that at the higher level of the Government, these executive decisions
taken by such officials go uncorrected, before it is taken up for judicial
scrutiny.
88. We are thus of the clear opinion that the decision on the part of the
State Government, purportedly, relinquishing the CIDCO's land at
Ghansoli, to be not utilized for Government Sports Complex, is brazenly
illegal and arbitrary, looked from any angle. In our opinion, there was no
need for the State Government to take a hurried decision during the
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
pendency of the petition and considering the case of the petitioner as
made out in the petition, as also in the teeth of the CIDCO illegally
resorting to make allotment of land from the land reserved for the
Government Sports Complex, to private parties (respondent No.5), and to
take decision to shift the same to Village Nanore, a remote area in the
Raigad District. Such decision, in the circumstances, which had fell for our
consideration, in no manner can be said to be justifiable, reasonable and
fair, and in fact, it is a decision against public interest and is a decision to
promote commercial utilization of the land, reserved for the Government
Sports Complex, by making it available for allotment to the developers
whose appetite for development of lands and converting cities into urban
jungles would remain unparallelled. It is for the Government and the
planners to ponder to the extent such concretization can be stretched,
more particularly, in the absence of supporting infrastructure and by
sacrificing public amenities of utmost necessity being made available for
the future generation, like gardens, playgrounds, recreation parks and
sports complexes.
89. We may also observe that considering the present plight of the
metro cities as Mumbai, Navi Mumbai or the adjoining areas have
developed the further concretization and commercial exploitation on lands
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
earmarked for such public facilities certainly needs to be curtailed and the
authorities are required to be alive to not only the present but the future
rights of the citizens for open places, playground, sports complex, to be
enjoyed by a common man. It is only in these circumstances, the
Government would reach out to the needs of a common man and not in
the manner as majoritively done by CIDCO. In our opinion, the
Government Sports Complex is of paramount importance to children and
youth who form the large mass of population in the urban areas
surrounding Navi Mumbai. It is wholly against the public interest to
deprive them of a Government Sports Complex and availability of best
sporting facilities so as to further the interest of sports, not only under the
policies of the Government of India but also of the State Government.
90. However, while saying so, we do not mind if the State Government
intends to have an additional sports facilities at Nanore, Mangaon for
whatever good the Government feels it can do for the children and youth
in the rural area of Raigad district. However, we cannot persuade
ourselves to come to a conclusion that such complex can in any manner be
a substitute for a sports complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai.
91. Insofar as the impugned action on the part of CIDCO in issuing the
August 2016 tender inviting bids for allotment of plots from the land
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
reserved for Government sports complex is concerned, in our opinion, the
same has been rightly questioned by the petitioner. It is not in dispute that
the land as tendered and allotted to respondent no. 5 was earmarked for
the Government's sports complex. In our opinion, such decision on the
part of CIDCO was an illegal decision taken without consulting the State
Government. In taking such decision, the CIDCO was certainly changing
the status of the land which was earmarked for a Government sports
complex to be allotted in open market. CIDCO has taken a consistent
position since the year 2003 till the bids were invited in the year August
2016, that the said land in Sector 12 and Sector 12A, would remain
earmarked for the Government sports complex. The justification which is
given by CIDCO to take steps to issue such tender neither satisfies our
conscience nor in our opinion would satisfy the test of reasonableness,
fairness and non-arbitrariness which were required to be followed by a
public body dealing with State largesse. It is quite surprising for the
CIDCO saying that as it did not hear from the State Government to take
and utilize the land for the sports complex, it was thought appropriate that
the same can be allotted to private parties by dividing the same into plots.
It is most significant that except for one plot as allotted to respondent no.
5, CIDCO could not allot the other plots, as no bidders came forward to
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
have such allotment. This appears to be for the reason that the players in
the field were quite aware that the land was earmarked for a Government
sports complex. The plan annexed to the tender document itself sets out
the earmarking for the Government sports complex. If the State
Government was to issue an express "no objection", CIDCO could have
dealt with the said land, however, in the present circumstances when
CIDCO had complete knowledge and was conscious that the land was
earmarked for the Government sports complex as also when the same was
disclosed in the tender, it was not fair and proper to invite such bids merely
on an assumption as gathered by it in August 2016 that the State
Government is not interested in the said land. It is most significant that
except respondent no. 5, who submitted its bid for the plot in question,
other three plots which were also sought to be auctioned, there were no
final takers for these plots. However, respondent no. 5, as a business
person, was fully aware of such position and the position CIDCO had
taken, submitted its bid and secured allotment of plot no. 4, which was
part of the land as earmarked for the Government sports complex and
when the same was contiguous land to the sports complex being developed
by NMMC. As contended on behalf of respondent no.5, it may be that
inviting tenders / bids and respondent no. 5 participating in the same was
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
as good as a routine procedure followed by CIDCO, however, we are not
on the procedure as followed by CIDCO, as in the present circumstances,
what would go to the root of the matter is the public interest being buried
by CIDCO in taking a decision of inviting bids of which respondent no. 5
has become beneficiary. In our opinion, CIDCO causing a dent to part of
the land earmarked for the Government Sports Complex itself was not
acceptable. It was not fair and proper for CIDCO to make a inroad to
change the nature of the land, so that in future a further commercialization
can pave its way.
92. We may observe that for the first time, the decision to shift the
sports complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon came to be taken vide
GR dated 26 March, 2021 whereas the tender was invited by CIDCO in
August, 2016 at which point of time the Government had not taken any
decision to give up with the utilization of land at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai
so that CIDCO could blatantly consider such land to be open land, at its
disposal to be dealt with by inviting bids for its commercial exploitation.
93. There is something more fundamental when we consider such
action of CIDCO from the perspective of CIDCO also being a planning
authority as the "New Town Development Authority". CIDCO had
prepared development plans for its different nodes (areas) in its capacity as
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
a new town development authority. Such development plan indicated
land use zones, although not making reservations as the planning
authority would otherwise do. It is also stated in its reply affidavit that the
nodal plans prepared by CIDCO earmarked the lands and not reserved it.
However, what is most significant is that at all material times such
earmarking was acted upon, implemented and considered, as if it was akin
to a reservation, and it is on such premise and footing, entire allotment and
development in Navi Mumbai has taken place in regard to the
development of different nodes. It is on this very footing, land was
earmarked for NMMC's sports complex and accordingly allotted to the
NMMC. Thus, NMMC was the beneficiary of an earmarking of the said
land allotted to it for Sports Complex which was an earmarking of the year
2003, however, the State Government although placed in the same
position has not been made such beneficiary. This approach on the part of
CIDCO is ex facie arbitrary. It would therefore be wholly misconceived
not only factually but also on the rules as followed by CIDCO, to hold that
merely as the land in question was earmarked for Government sports
complex, it needs to be considered to be not reserved for such purpose and
for such reason CIDCO could freely deal with the land. Thus, CIDCO's
decision to issue such tender was illegal, apart from being contrary to the
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
larger public interest as involved.
94. We may reiterate that in the present case earmarking of the land by
CIDCO for Government Sports Complex in its zoning or in the
development plan which CIDCO formulated, implemented and adhered
was nothing less than a reservation as created in public interest in favour of
the Government in the land in question proposed to be utilized for
Government sports complex. Hence, to decide to use the land for any
other purpose and namely for commercial exploitation in making
allotment to respondent no. 5 for construction of residential complex was
not only objectionable but wholly arbitrary and illegal. We have, thus, no
manner of doubt that such decision of CIDCO to invite tenders in August,
2016 and allot the plot of land to respondent no. 5 needs to be quashed
and set aside.
95. We may also observe that CIDCO is a public body and as reflected
from its affidavit, CIDCO is under a mandate to adhere to Government
policies and cater to the public interest being forwarded by the State
Government. In fact, CIDCO has solemnly stated on affidavit that the
entire land vested with CIDCO is of the ownership of State Government.
If this be so, a public body like CIDCO also ought to have acted with
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
public consciousness and ought not to have issued tenders and invited
bids, unless the Government through its Sports department in whose
interest the land in question was earmarked, was to communicate its clear
decision prior to August, 2016, giving up the land in question to be
utilized for the Government sports complex.
96. Now coming to the contention of the respondents on delay latches,
we may also observe that the argument of delay and latches being
canvassed on behalf of the respondents in assailing CIDCO's allotment of
the plot of land to respondent no. 5 would be required to be rejected in the
facts and circumstances of the present case, and more particularly
considering the overarching public interest. It is well settled that private
interest must give way to larger public interest, which is insurmountable.
This petition is not filed at such point of time that the position on the user
of land changed in such manner that such change had become irreversible,
moreover, the illegality in allotment of the part of the land to respondent
no.5 would itself go to the root of the matter. Moreover, respondent no. 5,
except for taking possession, has not utilized the land and thereafter by an
interim order dated 10 October, 2023, this Court had directed that there
shall be no further development of the plot of land in question.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
97. In any event, an argument of delay and latches cannot have a
straight jacket application. It would depend on the facts and circumstances
of the case and the Court would be required to examine objection on
different parameters and perspectives, as the facts and circumstances
demonstrate. Thus, in our opinion, although the petitioner has
approached after a period of about two years to assail such decision to allot
part of the land reserved for Government Sports Contract and before the
land can be utilized by respondent no. 5, for commercial development, in
the facts of the case, which are quite gross, we reject the respondent's
submission on delay and latches. For such reasons, Mr. Gangal's
submission referring to the decision in Bombay Dyeing (supra) that the
petition needs to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, does not
commend us in the facts and circumstances of the case. As discussed quite
in detail, it was not proper and legal for the CIDCO to initiate tender
process as also there was gross illegality in disturbing the earmarking of the
plot which was reserved since 2003 to be utilized for the Government
Sports Complex. Thus, when there is gross illegality and the nature of the
plot was not changed inasmuch as no construction has been commenced, it
cannot be said that the parties had irreversibly changed the position to
consider such delay to be fatal for the reliefs to be granted on the petition.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
In our opinion, in the present facts, respondent No.5 merely parting
money and depositing the same with CIDCO and even the possession
being handed over to respondent no.5 can neither be considered to be a
relevant factor when we tested on the touchstone of the doctrine of delay
and laches. More particularly, when the land which is earmarked, as of date
stands intact and the nature of the same in no manner whatsoever has been
changed insofar as physical utilization of the land is concerned. Equity can
never defeat or override law. In this view of the matter, as we have
observed that it is paramount considering the public interest, that the State
Government utilizes the land in question for the Government Sports
Complex. The allotment of the part of the land earmarked for the
Government Sports Complex in favour of respondent No.5 was wholly
arbitrary and illegal.
98. An allegation is made on behalf of respondent no.5 as also
supported on behalf of the CIDCO that the petitioner, being a body of
architects, is in fact interested in having the sports complex work to be
undertaken by its member or members, who would be professionals in
designing the stadiums or in similar activities, hence the present petition is
filed in the private interest of the petitioner's members requiring dismissal
on this count. We are not impressed with such contention as urged on
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
behalf of these respondents. In our opinion, these are too far-fetched
allegations that any direct interest is being pursued by the petitioner, in
praying that the land earmarked by CIDCO for Government Sports
Complex be utilized for such public purpose and be not utilized for any
other purpose. It may be that some of the architects or even private
developers may be engaged by the State Government in undertaking such
works and for that matter, it may be anybody, either from Maharashtra or
outside Maharashtra or under an inhouse mechanism, the State
Government may develop such infrastructure for sports, however, this
would not mean that any such motive can be attributed to the petitioner or
its member or members, that the petitioner as a body would become
interested in any proposed work on the subject land and hence what is
being pursued in the petition is private interest. In our opinion, such
contention is totally untenable, vague, which outrightly needs to be
rejected.
99. Now coming to the issue of pricing, we are of the clear opinion that
it is most unfortunate for the State Government as also on the part of the
CIDCO, which is a body of the State Government to have taken a stand to
give up public interest in setting up a Government Sports Complex at
Navi Mumbai. As clearly set out in the reply affidavit, the State
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government is in fact the owner of all the lands, which the State
Government itself has vested with CIDCO for its appropriate utilization
and which would include the land in question earmarked/reserved for the
Government sports complex. In fact these are the lands of the State
Government. In this view of the matter, it would be not only ostensible
but palpably unrealistic for the CIDCO and the State Government to blow
the pricing trumpet, more particularly as noted hereinabove, the CIDCO
had taken a categorical stand with the Sports Department to procure an
approval / NOC of the State Government for allotment of such land free
of costs. This albeit, that the land could be allotted at specified rate when
required in public interest (see: Regulation 4 of the "CIDCO Regulation").
In any event the State Government has acquired larger lands for the
purpose of the New Bombay project before they were being vested with
the CIDCO, for development as the new town development authority.
The State Government has never lost its ownership so as to assert, much
less legally, that it needs to pay a price for its own land. There is nothing
on record which can support such stand of the State Government and the
CIDCO that the State Government would be required to pay such large
amount to the CIDCO. There is no legal sanctity to such demand. With
such complexion of the things as they stand, insofar as the State
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
Government is concerned, the winds of pricing of the land at Rs.2500
crores which are sought to be canvased by the State Government as also
ostensibly accepted by the State Government and which the CIDCO and
the State Government wants the Court to believe is not only preposterous
but untenable looked from any angle.
100. We may observe that such stand of quoting an astronomical price to
be paid by the State Government to CIDCO, i.e., owner itself paying the
cost of the land to its own agent, is something which would shock our
judicial conscience. In our opinion, such seemingly untenable stand being
taken by the State Government and an eye wash of a pricing being thrown
at the public and the Court by the CIDCO and the State, when it comes to
providing a Government sports complex, a facility in paramount public
interest and a utility free of cost, to be made available for training in
variety of sports to thousands of children and youth for all times to come,
is a casualty in the whole process.
101. With quite a wrench, we observe that the State Government in
taking such decision, has acted against public interest to forfeit and desert a
project of public importance of having a government sports complex with
modern sports facilities being made available at Navi Mumbai, to benefit
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
large adjoining areas. In such decision, public interest is wholly sacrificed
and for whose benefit, is the curtain raiser.
102. We wonder as to what public good, public benefit or something of
such solemnity could be achieved by such decision of the State
Government. We are unable to find any persuading answer, as the only
consequence of such decision is to make such land reserved for last 21
years for a Government sports complex, to be made available for
commercial exploitation, so as to add to the existing concrete jungle by
providing more residential and commercial buildings. This is nothing but
commercialization being achieved on land earmarked for an important
purpose of Government Sports Complex, this more particularly for the
reason that the plot of land in question is close to the sea (the CRZ being
in proximity). It would not be out of place for the petitioner to think that
implicit in such decision is the interest of the builders/developers to avail
such land, hence it is not unlikely that the CIDCO and the State
Government have either overlooked this aspect and/or are promoting
commercialization of the land by sacrificing public interest in having
sports facilities. Both the authorities have shut their eyes to the future
needs of the citizens for sports facilities being provided by the
Government.
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
103. We may thus ponder as to whether the existing concretization is not
enough and to what extent the public bodies like CIDCO would continue
to exploit Government lands which were vested with them for good
planning, for the purpose of revenue. This more particularly for the
reason that since 2003 till date, the land has continued to remain
earmarked for Government sports complex.
104. We may observe that in taking such decision there is gross non-
application of mind and as to how the government has considered sports
to be the last priority and/or insignificant, when it comes to commercial
exploitation of land in urban agglomeration. We do not find that there is
any thought or study undertaken by the sports department in taking such
decision on the large number of sports facilities and recreational grounds
being made available in important cities all over the world. The impugned
decision hence appears to be totally arbitrary and ipse dixit of the
concerned high officials, who have thought it appropriate to disband the
earlier vision and good thinking of making a provision for a sports
complex at Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai. It is impossible to conceive a
situation that in the future in a city such as Navi Mumbai or Mumbai, such
land can be retrieved for sports facilities. The impugned decision therefore
not only lacks a holistic but a future vision regressive to the development
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
of sports. It is certainly not appropriate for the State to have such
deleterious policy of not making available sports facilities to a common
man. In such matters who would think of a common man is the question.
105. We also find that it was most inappropriate for the State
Government not to seek utilization of the said land for developing the
sports complex for a long period of 21 years and now when it comes to
utilization of the land by developing the sports facilities, take a position of
shifting such complex at a far away place. There is neither an insight nor
any perception for the welfare of the citizens nor a logic or a thought of
public good, in taking such decision. In our opinion, in the first place,
non-utilization of the land although ear-marked and completely to the
knowledge of the sports department itself has caused unimaginable
prejudice to the citizens being deprived of the sports facilities. We have,
therefore, no manner of doubt that the impugned GR dated 26 March,
2021 shifting the sports complex from Ghansoli to Nanore-Mangaon and
the reasons attributed thereunder are patently illegal, arbitrary and
unconstitutional.
106. We may also observe that the sports policies which are being shown
to the public at large cannot be kept to be paper policies, and not to be
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
implemented. Lackadaisical approach and priority as given by the State
Government in developing the government sports complex at Ghansoli,
Navi Mumbai, speaks volumes at the approach of the concerned officers
towards sports. It is unthinkable that the State Government can keep the
land earmarked and not utilize the same for the public purpose for which
it was earmarked. It is high time that the State Government becomes
conscious that it is equally important that the children and youth in
Mumbai and Navi Mumbai and the large adjoining areas are made
available all kinds of sports facilities. Sports plays a significant role in the
development of citizens and the nation. The petitioner would not be
incorrect in contending that the State ought not to lack behind in sports by
not creating facilities in the urban centres and deprive the citizens of such
facilities. It is high time that these issues are also considered to be of equal
importance than the commercialization and concretization mantra.
107. We may also observe that the entire approach of not only the State
Government but also the CIDCO has been nebulous to the importance
which the sports have achieved in modern times. A progressive State can
never be oblivious of such needs of the society and more particularly, from
the international perception. It ought to be the solemn obligation of a
Welfare State to encourage youth and children towards the sports, which is
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
not only the domestic but the international perception. This also
contributes in creating a robust and a healthy society. There is ample
material as also judicial pronouncements which would underscore the
importance of sports. We will be failing in our duty if we do not refer to
the relevant literature and the judicial opinion in such context.
K. Relevant decisions of the Supreme Court
108. In such context, at the outset we may refer to a learned article of
Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, Assistant Professor of Law in Hidayatullah
National Law University, Raipur, titled 'Issues in Emerging Area of Sports
Law: Lex Sportiva6'. The learned author has described the importance of
sports when he says that 'sports, games and physical fitness have been a
vital component of our civilization, as evident from the existence of the
highly evolved system of yoga and a vast range of highly developed
indigenous games, including martial arts. He says that the intrinsic linkage
between sports and games and the human quest for excellence was
recognized ever since the inception of human civilization, reaching its
epitome in the ancient Greek civilization, which was the progenitor of the
Olympic movement. In such context, the relevant extract of his article
needs to be noted which reads thus:-
6https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2972059#:~:text=There%20are%20larger%20issues
%20of,when%20he%20plays%20the%20game
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
"In India, history of sports can be traced back to the epic of
Mahabharata which narrates an incidence where a game called
Chaturang was played between two groups of warring cousins
Pandavas and Kauravas. Sports have been treated as important
aspect of human development. A famous saying goes "all work
and no play makes jack a dull boy." Sport has traditionally seen
itself as a private social activity separate from the reach of legal
frameworks. As Foster explains, 'legal norms are fixed rules which
prescribe rights and duties; relationships within the social world of
sport are not seen in this way'.
However, in the recent years the sports have not only remained an
activity of physical development of body or an activity of
entertainment, but has acquired a professional approach rather a
business proportion involving many stakeholders. With high
salaries, ticket prices, and profits, professional sports are no longer
just a game, but a big business worth billions of dollars."
1.1 Sports for Development
The International Charter of Physical Education and Sport,
UNESCO, 1978 states that:
"Every human being has a fundamental right of access to
physical education and sport, which are essential for the
full development of his personality. The freedom to
develop physical, intellectual and moral powers through
physical education and sport must be guaranteed both
within the educational system and in other aspects of social
life."
The United Nations adopted the theme of "Sport for
Development and Peace" in its Agenda in 2001, which
demonstrated the close linkage between Sports development and
Youth development, and Youth development and the
achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Further, the
United Nations General Assembly celebrated 2005 as the "Year of
Sport and Physical Education" thereby emphasizing the need to
integrate sport and physical education into the overall
development agenda."
(emphasis supplied)
109. Another article of Shri. Kanwal DP Singh and Harshita Singh 7
7Amenability of Sports Law to Management of Sports in India, https://www.amity.edu/abs/abr/pdf/Vol
%2014%20No.2/2.pdf
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
speaks about the importance of sports in the context of developing
countries. The learned authors succinctly described the importance of
sports, the relevant extract of which is as under:-
"The successful bidding to host an international sporting event is a
unique opportunity for developing countries to showcase their
progress, development and their world standing through their soft
power. Similarly this Common Wealth Games had huge impact
for India; it spread the message that India is country who is ready
to lead on all front. CWG in India was the platform through
which India gave the message to the World about Incredible India,
Indian Army, Fastest Developing Nation etc. But this change and
fast development in sports field needs a protection from the
problems of anti-doping, sexual harassment and age fraud.
Now mega sports events added to the progress of any nation.
That's why Nations are bidding to host the mega events like
Olympic, World Camps, Common Wealth Games etc.
With the largest youth population in the world and one of the
fastest developing economies, India has witnessed progressive
growth in its sports industry in the past few years. Global events
like Commonwealth Games, thriving new infrastructure and large
fan following for diverse sports is making India a major sports
destination."
(emphasis supplied)
110. In the context of sports achieving a prime position in a large country
like ours and as to what is the judicial opinion on such issues, can be
profitably seen from some of the decisions wherein the Courts have laid
emphasis on the importance of sports. In such context, at the outset, we
refer to an order passed by a Division Bench of High Court of Jammu and
Kashmir in Court on its own motion vs. Union of India & Ors. 8 wherein
8PIL No.25/2018, dt. of decision 24/10/2018
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
the Court was dealing with efficiency of the sports facilities in the State of
Jammu and Kashmir. The relevant observations of the Court on
importance of sports and the facilities in that regard to be provided by the
State, are required to be noted which read thus:
"4. There can be no doubt at all that sports enhances the physical and
mental development of all persons. The participation in sports activities
helps in development of healthy bones and muscles, increases fitness,
improves sleep, enables socialization, improves the cooperation skills,
boosts self-confidence. Being involved in a sport teaches valuable
lessons in teamwork, most importantly, it takes away depression and
reduces stress. Sports essentially facilitates development of patience,
rectitude, comradeship, a new sense of togetherness and belonging.
5. It is critical to remember that sports provides a safe and healthy
platform for learning control, coping with defeat and helps building
resilience. Furthermore, the following the rules of game inculcates
discipline, punctuality and respect for authority. Sports thus plays a vital
role in the child's development of self-esteem and self-worth.
6. The importance of sports in the life of any person cannot be
sufficiently emphasized. Participation in sporting activities is a building
block in bringing in habits of discipline, rectitude, perseverance,
commitment and most importantly developing an ability to work in
teams. It provides a critical outlet for the energy possessed by young
children and the youth. It enables a healthy pastime for utilization of
free times. It contributes greatly to the development of the health of the
participating persons and motivates not only the participants but also
the onlookers towards healthy competition and inculcation of a spirit of
cooperation, thrill and enjoyment. Participation in healthy sporting and
gaming activity facilitates sharing of skills, differential abilities as well as
creativity. It contributes to building a more sensitive, innovative,
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
equitable, fair community and world.
7. Such facilities are available to the children, youth and persons of
all ages and culture in every part of the country. ... ... ...
9. There are more than 50 sporting events in which sports persons
compete in the Olympic Games, like, Aquatics, Athletics, Archery,
Badminton, Basketball, Boxing, Cycling, Football, Golf, Gymnastics,
Handball, Judo, Shooting, Table Tennis, Taekwondo, Tennis,
Volleyball, Weightlifting, Karate etc. Indian Sports persons competes in
most of the Olympic events. Similarly, there are other multiple sporting
events in which sports persons from India compete in other
international competitions including the Common Wealth Games,
Asian Games etc. These include inter alia, the Athletic Federation of
India, Badminton Association of India, Basketball Federation of India,
Billiards & Snookers Federation of India, Indian Body Builders
Federation, Boxing Federation of India, All India Chess Federation,
Cycling Federation of India, All India Football Federation, Swimming
Federation of India, etc.
10. The Central Government has also ensured a budgetary allocation
for the subject of sports which it is dispensing to the above sports
bodies who have promoted themselves as being responsible for specific
sports for all the States of the Country. There is no reason at all as to
why the Government of India as well as the Government of Jammu and
Kashmir and the sports bodies ought not to be required to ensure
provisions of the sporting facilities in the State of Jammu and Kashmir ."
(emphasis supplied)
111. The Supreme Court in Krishan Lal Gera Vs. State of Haryana &
Ors.9 was dealing with the accessibility of the sports facilities in a stadium
9 (2011)10 SCC 529
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
to the public and not merely to the limited members of a club. It was held
that sports complex cannot be converted into recreation club. On the
importance of sports activities and the infrastructure required for the same,
the Court made the following significant observations:-
"18. The stadium and infrastructure therein are meant for the benefit
of the people. Sports promote health, spirit of competition, and social
integration. The sports facilities in the stadium are meant to be used by
residents and sportspersons of the city/town and surrounding areas. The
prime area of the stadium cannot be taken over by persons in power
and the rich and mighty for an elitist recreational club by paying a
token annual rent of Re 1.
... .. ... .. .
21. Whenever nepotism, favouritism and unwarranted government
largesse to private interests, threaten to frustrate schemes for public
benefit, it is the duty of the High Courts to strike at such action. The
stadium is meant for improving and developing sports and
sportspersons. But slowly and steadily these are ignored by stating that
the funds are not available for maintenance or people are not coming to
use the facilities. The standard refrain is that a part of the stadia or
sports facility can be used for non-sports activities generating funds for
the upkeep of the stadium. In no time, an exclusive recreational club is
established for those in power, those who have access to power and
those who can afford to pay hefty sums to access the facilities by way of
membership. Thus, valuable State resources meant for the general
public, for the poor and the needy who require the facilities to improve
themselves, are denied access and the entire facility becomes the
domain of a chosen few. What started as a multipurpose stadium for the
benefit of citizens becomes partly a private recreational club and partly
a neglected unused stadium. What started as a club then goes into
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
private hands for commercial exploitation for a hotel or for conducting
marriages and other functions. The only "sports" activity regularly held
is in the card-room. Unfortunately, all this is done under the nose of the
District Administration, in a centrally located property belonging to the
Municipal Corporation and controlled by the District Sports Council.
22. Creating a sports ground, encouraging sports is a part of human
resource development which is the function of the State. No part of the
stadia or sports grounds can be carved out for non-sport or commercial
activities to be run by recreational clubs or by private entrepreneurs.
Recreational clubs are not sports clubs. Nothing prevents the Municipal
Corporation or District Administration from running these sports
facilities either directly or through registered associations without any
restriction as to membership. After all human resource development
and the health and welfare of the citizens is one of the main functions
and responsibility of the Governments.
... .... .. ..
24. The country requires world-class infrastructure to train potential
athletes and sportspersons. It is not sufficient if infrastructure is created,
but such infrastructure and facilities should be properly maintained and
optimum utilisation of the infrastructure should be ensured.
... ... ... ... .
29. Lack of commitment to the cause of sports has ensured that India
remains at the bottom rungs of any international sports event, though it
boasts of one-sixth of world population. Development of sports
infrastructure does not mean spending hundreds of crores for
infrastructure for some international event and then allowing the entire
infrastructure to go waste, but to ensure continuous and effective use of
those facilities and provide adequate maintenance and upkeep. Basic
sports infrastructure should be made available at village, taluka and
district levels and there should be a comprehensive plan for optimum
utilisation of the facilities already available so that they are accessible to
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
sportspersons. The Government cannot allow sports facilities and sports
bodies to be hijacked by persons totally unconnected with sports for
private gain or for the benefit of an exclusive few. The State of Haryana
prides itself in giving importance to sports. We do hope that the State
administration realises the needs of the society and the need for
improving sports as an integral part of human resources development.
Participation in sports and sport competitions builds patriotism and
national pride, apart from other regular benefits."
(emphasis supplied)
112. It is thus clear that sports facilities, which includes the physical area
(land), equipments and the entire infrastructure so created are supposed to
be utilized for such purpose, cannot be exploited to be used for any other
much less a commercial purpose. If this be so, was it proper that in the
present case, the entire land reserved for Government Sports Complex be
abandoned.
113. In K. Murugan V. Fencing Association of India, Jabalpur & Ors. 10
the Supreme Court observed that sports has a role to play in building up
good citizens, which needs to be kept in view. The Court stated that
despite money being allotted for the purpose of improvement of sports,
the result has been considerably poor and deceptive. It was also observed
that such criticism being heard from everywhere in this country also needs
to be given due consideration by the authorities.
10 (1991)2 SCC 412
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
114. In the context of the law as discussed hereinabove, and the
importance sports have gained internationally there is a foremost need to
have effective and free sports facilities. We may also observe that the
efforts of Government of India in promoting sports by allocation of funds
for such purpose to the States under the National Service Scheme (NSS),
Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan (NYKS), etc. are progressive steps being
taken in such direction. In fact, when in the year 2003 the State
Government proposed to set up a "Government Sports Complex" at
Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai, it was certainly a very appreciable and a positive
step towards development of sports in Maharashtra which certainly had a
vision of a national contribution to sports implicit in it the larger welfare of
youth and children on such count. Such foresight of the State
Government certainly deserved an applause, except for the depletion of
such vision and the miserable failure on the part of the State Government
to take further steps to make the same a reality, by keeping the land in
question vacant for all these years, which by any standard amounts to a
gross inaction.
115. We have accordingly answered the questions as posed by us in the
aforesaid terms.
116. In the light of the above discussion, certainly the petition deserves
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
to succeed. It is accordingly allowed by the following order:
ORDE R
(i) The impugned decision of the State Government as
contained in Government Resolution dated 26 March, 2021, in
shifting the Government sports complex from Sector 12 and 12A,
Ghansoli to Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon, District Raigad is
arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. It is accordingly quashed
and set aside.
(ii) CIDCO is directed to handover the entire land in Sector 12
and 12A, Ghansoli, as earmarked for the Government Sports
Complex to the State Government, to be utilized for the purpose
of "Government Sports Complex", free of cost or at a specified
price in terms of Regulation 4 of the 2008 Regulations or on
similar terms as received by CIDCO from the Navi Mumbai
Municipal Corporation, for the adjoining land allotted for its
sports complex.
(iii) The allotment of plot no. 4, Sector 12 in favour of respondent
no. 5 as made by CIDCO vide allotment letter dated 27 January,
2017 is quashed and set aside. CIDCO is directed to refund
01 July, 2024
PIL 28-2019FINAL.DOC
respondent no. 5 the amounts as paid by respondent no. 5 for
allotment of said plot, along with interest @9% p.a. till the date of
actual payment.
(iv) It is clarified that the State Government, if so desires, may
develop the sports complex at Village Nanore, Taluka Mangaon as
a District Sports Complex or an additional sports complex.
117. The petition is, accordingly, allowed in the aforesaid terms. No
costs.
118. At this stage, Mr. Gangal, learned counsel for CIDCO, Mr. Samant,
learned Addl. Government Pleader as also Mr. Jahagirdar, learned senior
counsel for respondent no. 5 have prayed for stay of the aforesaid order for
a period of eight weeks. We accept their request, however, in the facts and
circumstances of the case, we stay paragraph 116(ii) of our order for a
period of four weeks from today.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI , J.)
01 July, 2024
Signed by: Vidya S. Amin
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 01/07/2024 20:11:52
