Gaon Sabha Libaspur Welfare ... vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors
2014 Latest Caselaw 6642 Del

*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                      Date of decision: 10th December, 2014

+                W.P.(C) 3201/2014 & CM No.6659/2014 (for stay)

        GAON SABHA LIBASPUR WELFARE ASSOCIATION
        THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT                        ..... Petitioner
                     Through: Mr. Vikramjit Saini, Adv.

                                  Versus

    GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS             ..... Respondents
                  Through: Mr. Amitabh Marwah, Adv. for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed as a

Public Interest Litigation (PIL), impugns the allotment of Khasra Nos.23/21,

24/25, 31/1 and 31/10 of village Libaspur, District North-West by the

Director (Panchayat), Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi

(GNCTD) vide letter dated 7th July, 2012 to the Directorate of Education

and seeks a direction to the respondent GNCTD to, out of the aforesaid land

leave out land in Khasra Nos.23/21 and 24/25 ad-measuring 7 Bighas and 7

Biswas for construction of Multi Purpose Community Centre (MPCC).

2. It is the contention of the petitioner, claiming to be working for the

benefit and upliftment of village Libaspur and its residents, that:

(i) There is no Community Centre for the purpose of social as well

as personal gatherings and celebratory functions for the

residents of village Libaspur.

(ii) The residents of the village had been representing therefor and

submitted a proposal for construction of a MPCC on the

aforesaid land admeasuring 7 Bighas and 7 Biswas in Khasra

Nos.23/21 and 24/25 belonging to the Gaon Sabha of the

village and the said land was earmarked for the said purpose

and field inspection and other formalities were complied with

and the land was made available for the purpose of MPCC by

the Gaon Sabha.

(iii) The Revenue Department of the GNCTD also permitted the

same and also approved funds of Rs.66.64 lacs for construction

of boundary wall for the purpose of MPCC vide File

No.FN.F9/Misc./PDRD/09-10/5560 dated 19th January, 2011.

(iv) The project of construction of the MPCC over the said land was

also approved by the Block Development Officer (BDO) of the

concerned area.

(v) In the last week of August, 2013, the work of construction of

boundary wall of the said land was commenced and the

villagers thought that the same was being done for the purpose

of MPCC.

(vi) However, subsequently, one signboard of the said construction

work being for Government Girls School was put up and

wherefrom the local residents for the first time came to know

that the construction of a girls school on the said laid was

underway.

(vii) The residents of the village on enquiry learnt that the

Lieutenant Governor, Delhi had directed the Director

(Panchayat), GNCTD to allot 16 Bighas of land to the

Directorate of Education, GNCTD and on the directions of the

Director (Panchayat), GNCTD, the land in Khasra Nos.23/21,

24/25, 31/1 and 31/10 was allotted to the Education Department

vide letter dated 7th February, 2012.

(viii) The petitioner represented against the use of the land meant for

MPCC for the purpose of a girl school but to no avail.

(ix) While there is no such Community Centre in village Libaspur

and surrounding areas, there are many schools for boys and

girls in the area of village Libaspur.

Accordingly, besides the reliefs aforesaid, relief also of

restraining the work of construction of the Government Girls

School on the aforesaid land is claimed.

3. The petition was entertained and notice thereof issued.

4. The BDO (North) of the GNCTD has filed a counter affidavit,

pleading that:

(a) The land in Khasra Nos.23/21 (4-16), 24/25(2-7), 31/1 (4-15)

and 10(4-2), total 16 Bighas was recorded in the name of the

Gram Sabha of village Libaspur in the Revenue Records.

(b) A request was received from the MLA of the area for

earmarking 7 Bighas and 3 Biswas of the aforesaid land in

Khasra Nos.23/21 and 24/25 for a Community Centre.

(c) Accordingly, a proposal was made and construction of the

boundary wall commenced.

(d) However there were protests from the residents of the area as

the proposed Community Centre was appurtenant to a

Government Boys Secondary School and both have common

boundary.

(e) There are four Choupals / Panchayat Ghars already constructed

in village abadi of Libaspur for the purpose of community

activities.

(f) On the contrary, there is no school for the education of girls in

village Libaspur.

(g) In the circumstances, it was decided that a Government Girls

School should be constructed for the purpose of promoting

education of girls in village abadi of Libaspur.

(h) The said proposal was also supported by the local residents.

(i) Accordingly, the land aforesaid was allotted to the Education

Department and possession of the land also handed over and

construction of the boundary wall completed.

(j) The construction of the School is in general public interest

rather than being prejudicial thereto.

(k) On the contrary, construction of a MPCC on the said land

would be prejudicial to the adjoining Government Boys

Secondary School.

(l) Otherwise, village Libaspur is fully built up and the area is a

developed colony as well as industrial area and there is no other

land available for a girls school.

(m) There was no official decision for construction of MPCC on the

said land but only a proposal.

5. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder, generally denying the contents of

the counter affidavit and reiterating the contents of the petition but not

expressly denying the contents of the counter affidavit duly supported by

documents.

6. We have heard the counsel for the petitioner who has reiterated the

pleadings.

7. The counsel for the respondent No.1 GNCTD has handed over further

documents to show that since the approval of the design and construction of

the school building on the aforesaid land was likely to take time, as an

interregnum measure 20 SPS rooms have been constructed on the land to

enable the Girls Senior Secondary School to start. He has also handed over

photographs showing the structure existing of Adarsh Senior Secondary

School to demonstrate that the said land is adjacent thereto.

8. The petitioner, though bearing a name of Gaon Sabha of Libaspur but

is not the Gaon Sabha of Libaspur which could be said to be the

representative of the residents of the said area. In fact, it is not even a

welfare association of the residents of the said village, though claims to be

working for their welfare and having filed this petition for the benefits of the

residents of the village. We have, as such to determine whether the

petitioner actually represents the interest of the residents of the village

Libaspur, enquired from the counsel for the petitioner as to what is the

approximate population of the said village and how many residents of the

village are the members of the petitioner Society.

9. The counsel for the petitioner though unable to give even

approximately the population of the said village, informs that there are only

15 members of the petitioner Association and who are all residents of the

said village.

10. To say the least, the petitioner cannot be said to be representative of

the residents of the said village. In fact, we entertain doubts whether the

said 15 persons are acting in the interest of the village and its residents or

out of their own personal considerations.

11. We have no reason to doubt the averments in the counter affidavit of

the respondent GNCTD that the proposal for construction of a MPCC on the

said land was opposed by the residents and that construction of a

Government Girl School on the said land is in the interest of the public.

After all, it is the Gaon Sabha and the Government which is representative

of the interest of the residents of the village and a busybody like the

petitioner cannot be permitted to come in the way of such public projects.

12. We therefore do not find any merit in the petition and dismiss the

same with costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the GNCTD within one month of

today.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

CHIEF JUSTICE DECEMBER 10, 2014 'gsr'