Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Shanti vs Jodhpur Development Authority, ... on 1 April, 2022

Bench: Vijay Bishnoi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4241/2022

Smt. Shanti W/o Binja Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Rabadia, Panchayat Samiti Dhwa, Tehsil Luni, District Jodhpur, Presently Working As Up-Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya, Panchayat Samiti Dhwa, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur, Through Its Secretary, JDA, Jodhpur.

2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jodhpur.

3. Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Dhwa, District Jodhpur.

4. Gram Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya, Panchayat Samiti Dhwa, Tehsil Luni, District Jodhpur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Moti Singh



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

                                    Order

01/04/2022

This writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner

essentially being aggrieved with the allotment of 500 square

meters of land of Khasara No.62/5 of Village Imam Nagar for the

purpose of construction of new Panchayat Bhawan of Gram

Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya. The said allotment was made by

the respondent No.1 - Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur

(hereinafter to be referred as 'the respondent No.1 - JDA') vide

allotment letter dated 12.10.2021.

The petitioner has also challenged the order dated

10.03.2022 passed by the District Program Coordinator Mahatma

(2 of 6) [CW-4241/2022]

Gandhi NREGA and District Collector, Jodhpur (hereinafter to be

referred as 'the District Collector, Jodhpur'), whereby it has

sanctioned the amount of Rs.39.12 lac for the purpose of

construction of new Gram Panchayat Bhawan and a multipurpose

hall for the use of self help group as well as for panchayat use at

Gram Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya.

The petitioner is Up-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Imam

Nagar Rabadiya, Panchayat Samiti Dhwa, District Jodhpur and is

claiming that the land allotted for the purpose of construction of

new Panchayat Bhawan is not suitable place for the same. It is

also claimed that as per the orders and guidelines issued by the

State Government from time to time, at least 3 acres (5 bighas) of

land is required for the purpose of construction of Panchayat

Bhawan but the respondent No.1 - JDA has allotted less than 3

acres (5 bighas) of land for the said purpose. It is further claimed

that allotment of the land by the respondent No.1 - JDA was

made only at the request of Sarpanch alone and the entire Gram

Panchayat was not taken into confidence before the allotment of

the land in question.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per

the Condition for (Allotment of Unoccupied Govt. Agricultural

Lands for the Construction of Schools, Colleges, Dispensaries,

Dharmshalas & Other Buildings of Public Utility), 1963 (hereinafter

to be referred as 'the Condition of 1963'), the minimum area of 1

acre (1.67 bighas) is required to be allotted for the purpose of

construction of Panchayat Bhawan but the allotment made by the

respondent No.1 - JDA of less amount of land is illegal.

(3 of 6) [CW-4241/2022]

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that

as there is no proposal either from Gram Panchayat or from Gram

Sabha, the allotment made by the respondent No.1 - JDA of land

less than 3 acres is illegal and the same is liable to be set aside.

It is also averred in the writ petition that the many

representations were filed on behalf of the villagers before the

respondent No. 2 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur

but no heed was paid to the said representations and the District

Collector, Jodhpur vide order dated 10.03.2022 has illegally

granted financial and administrative sanction for construction of

new Panchayat Bhawan at Gram Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the

material available on record.

The petitioner in Para No.13 of the writ petition has clearly

averred that according to the revenue record the land of Khasara

No.62/5 of Village Imam Nagar is entered in the name of

respondent No.1 - JDA and as such when the land in question

itself is recorded in the name of respondent No.1 - JDA, this Court

does not find any illegality in the action of respondent No.1 - JDA

of allotting the land of Khasara No.62/5 of Village Imam Nagar for

the purpose of construction of new Panchayat Bhawan of Gram

Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya.

So far as the orders and guidelines issued by the State

Government on 13.03.2020 and 07.09.2020 for the purpose of

construction of Panchayat Bhawan are concerned, it has nowhere

been provided that minimum 3 acres (5 bighas) of land is required

to be allotted for the purpose of construction of Panchayat Bhawan

but it is mentioned that around 3 acres (5 bighas) of land is required

(4 of 6) [CW-4241/2022]

to be allotted for the purpose of construction of Panchayat

Bhawan.

Moreover, the petitioner has failed to indicate that the orders

and guidelines issued by the State Government for the purpose of

construction of Panchayat Bhawan are statutory in nature.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the

decision dated 02.09.2021 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this

Court in Gram Panchayat Bakaner & Ors. Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1287/2021)

and argued that the land for the purpose of construction of

Panchayat Bhawan can only be allotted or earmarked as per the

resolution of the Gram Sabha itself.

I have perused the order dated 02.09.2021 passed by the

Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Gram Panchayat

Bakaner (supra), wherein the Gram Sabha of the concerned

Gram Panchayat passed three resolutions and by which it was

unanimously decided to construct the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at

a particular place, however, ignoring the said resolutions of the

Gram Sabha of the Gram Panchayat concerned, the State decided

to construct a Gram Panchayat Bhawan at a place other than the

place selected by the Gram Sabha. In that view, the Coordinate

Bench of this Court, after taking into consideration the provisions

of Articles 243A and 243B of the Constitution of India and the

provisions of Sections 8A and 8E of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj

Act, 1994, has held that the State cannot ignore the resolutions of

the Gram Sabha and is required to implement the decision of the

Gram Sabha for the purpose of activities of the Panchayat.

(5 of 6) [CW-4241/2022]

In the present case, the petitioner has failed to point out any

resolution of the Gram Sabha of Gram Panchayat Imam Nagar

Rabadiya in respect of the construction of Panchayat Bhawan.

In such circumstances, the order dated 02.09.2021 passed in

the case of Gram Panchayat Bakaner (supra), on which learned

counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance, is of no help to the

petitioner.

It is also to be noticed that as per Clause 2 of Condition of

1963, the maximum area up to 1 acre is required to be allotted for

the purpose of Panchayat Ghar or not minimum of 1 acre is

required to be allotted as contended by the petitioner.

Apart from this the Division Bench of this Court vide order

dated 20.10.2021 passed in Sagram Ram & Ors. Vs. The State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6523/2021)

while considering the dispute regarding construction of Gram

Panchayat Bhawan has observed as under :-

"What should be the ideal location for construction of public facilities such as Gram Panchayat Bhawan, cannot be a subject matter of consideration by the Court, that too in a public interest litigation. Such consideration must be left to the Government administration. Unless it is ex-facie arbitrary, illegal or malafide or against the mandatory Rules, the High Court would not mandate change of location for construction of a building, such as Gram Panchayat Bhawan."

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in J.R. Raghupathy Vs. State

of A.P. reported in (1988) 4 SCC 364 has observed as under :-

"31. We find it rather difficult to sustain the judgment of the High Court in some of the cases where it has interfered with the location of Mandal Headquarters and quashed the

(6 of 6) [CW-4241/2022]

impugned notifications on the ground that the Government acted in breach of the guidelines in that one place or the other was more centrally located or that location at the other place would promote general public convenience, or that the headquarters should be fixed at a particular place with a view to develop the area surrounded by it. The location of headquarters by the Government by the issue of the final notification under subsection (5) of Section 3 of the Act was on a consideration by the Cabinet Sub-Committee of the proposals submitted by the Collectors concerned and the objections and suggestions received from the local authorities like the Gram Panchayats and the general public. Even assuming that the Government while accepting the recommendations of the Cabinet Sub-Committee directed that the Mandal Headquarters should be at place `X' rather than place `Y' as recommended by the Collector concerned in a particular case, the High Court would not have issued a writ in the nature of mandamus to enforce the guidelines which were nothing more than administrative instructions not having any statutory force, which did not give rise to any legal right in favour of the writ petitioners."

In the present case, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate

that there is flagrant violation of any provision of law/rules in

allotting the land in question for the purpose of construction of

Panchayat Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Imam Nagar Rabadiya or

the action of the respondents suffer from any malafides,

therefore, I don't find any case for interference.