Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 68 (RAJ)

Ram Sharan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

2003-01-17

ASHOK PARIHAR, M.R.CALLA

body2003
JUDGMENT 1. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation is pending since 15th February, 2002 before this Court with the prayer made against the allotment of the land made by the Jaipur Department Authority in favour of the private respondents vide order dated 25.1.2001 may be quashed and set-aside and the decision taken by the Urban Development and Housing Department as communicated vide letter dated 18.7.2001 to the JDA to provide 100 ft. wide road to the private respondents may also be quashed and set-aside. Directions have also been sought against the respondents to demolish the construction which has already been raised and that the order issued under the signatures of Deputy Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department to the JDA to allot 18.833 sq. mtr. land may also be quashed and set-aside and the respondents may be directed not to give possession of the aforesaid land to the private respondent companies. Directions have also been sought against the circulars dated 22nd December, 1999 and 26th May, 2000 and all other such instructions and circulars permitting the regularisation of the land which has vested in the Government after taking the charge as prescribed in these circulars may be quashed and set-aside as the same are being contrary to law and if need arises rule 15-B inserted in Rajasthan Urban Improvement Trust (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 may also be quashed and set-aside. 2. Notice in this case was issued on 15th March, 2003 and thereafter, reply has been filed and on behalf of the petitioners a rebuttal affidavit has also been filed. The pleadings in the matter are complete. 3. The case of the respondents is that by this time, the whole project has been completed and a sum of Rs. twenty crore has been spent on this project. Besides this, it has been pointed out that the basic grievance which has been raised in this matter was that the site of this project is close to the existing Air Port and for this project 'No,Objection Certificate' was not taken from the concerned authorities. 4. Our attention was drawn by the respondents to the document (Annexure-R-54) dated 4th June, 2001 issued by the Airports Authority of India under the signature of Sr. Manager (ATC) for Airport Authority of India. 4. Our attention was drawn by the respondents to the document (Annexure-R-54) dated 4th June, 2001 issued by the Airports Authority of India under the signature of Sr. Manager (ATC) for Airport Authority of India. This document makes it clear that in the matter of project in question i.e. Multiplex Complex & Entertainment Center, Jaipur, the NOC has been given and it has been clearly mentioned in this document that the Authority of Airports India, has no objection to the proposed construction of the M/s. Entertainment Paradise. Thus, the basic fact for which the petitioners came to this Court, that the proposed construction of the project was being carried out without NOC by the Airports Authority of India, does not exist and it is found to be factually incorrect. Once, the Airports Authority, has given the NOC, the other necessary requirements have been fulfilled and there remains nothing for this Court to interfere in this completed project. Even otherwise, to have such entertainment centers at proper places in accordance with rules, is a matter of policy with the Government and this Court is not supposed to interfere with the establishment of such project by way of judicial review unless there is any flagrant violation of law. 5. The petitioners have failed to point out any violation of law before us on the basis of which it can be said that such a project should not have been allowed. The site in question is at a distance of 1,300 meters from the place of Airport, whereas the distance should not be less than 900 mts. from the Airport. 6. The petitioners in this writ petition are the residents of Bapu Nagar Jaipur and the Man Sarovar, Jaipur and we do not find on the basis of the pleadings of the petitioners and in view of the reply having been filed by the respondents that any element of public interest is involved in demolishing the duly constructed and functional project, when no objection certificate given by the Airport Authority is already there. We find that this writ petition does not even remotely involve any public interest so as to call for any interference by this Court. 7. There is not merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed.Writ Petition Dismissed. *******