Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1170 (PNJ)

Gaurav Chhabra v. Union Of India

2009-07-16

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, T.S.THAKUR

body2009
Judgment T.S.Thakur, J. 1. This petition has been filed in public interest. It brings into focus what according to the petitioner is uncalled for interference with what happens to be a heritage site of considerable importance from the educational point of view comprising a large water body surrounded by thick natural vegetation and abundant bio-diversity in Sector 26 of Chandigarh. 2. The petitioners apprehension is that the site in question which is frequented by people living in the city of Chandigarh and school children is sought to be taken over by the Administration for setting up of a Civil Services Officers Institute for IAS officers. Any such take over of the area would, according to the petitioner be against public interest as the same would deprive the citizens of the green patch which has been traditionally used as a green spot supporting bio-diversity in the area. 3. Mr. Shergill, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that there was need for maintaining and preserving the flora and fauna of green patches in Chandigarh, as also in the site mentioned above, which is sought to be taken over for a purpose totally different from the one for which it has been hithertofore used. 4. In response to a notice issued by this Court, Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh has filed a reply on the affidavit of Sanjay Kumar, IAS, Finance Secretary cum Secretary, Urban Planning, UT Chandigarh, in which the allegation that the Administration was taking over the site for setting up Civil Services Officers Institute has been denied. The affidavit further states that the Administration proposes to set up a Butterfly Park at the site in question and a proposal in that behalf has been approved by the Administrator, UT Chandigarh on 29.03.2009. The said park shall comprise 7.144 acres within the area in dispute, although, the detailed design of the park has not been worked out. It is further stated that the park will be consistent with basic the character of the existing site and its existing natural features such as trees and the water body(pond). It is also stated that the natural environment of the site will be maintained. 5. It is further stated that the park will be consistent with basic the character of the existing site and its existing natural features such as trees and the water body(pond). It is also stated that the natural environment of the site will be maintained. 5. In the light of the specific stand taken by the respondent- Department, we see no basis for apprehension that the site in question may still be used by the Administration for setting up any institute for the officers or otherwise. 6. Mr. Shergill, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner next argued that the efforts to dry up the area by making it thirst for water and consequent destruction of its basic character are still on as the Municipal Corporation which was earlier supplying water to the pond is no longer doing so. This position is disputed by learned counsel for the Administration who submits on instructions that the water supply for the pond continues as before and the allegation that the pond will be made to dry up in due course is without any basis. 7. Apart from the fact that there is no allegation in the writ petition that the pond is not being fed with water in an attempt to make it go dry, even the Municipal Corporation has not been impleaded as a party to these proceedings. No relief against the Municipal Corporation to continue the supply of the water has been prayed for. The argument that the water supply is being disconnected appears to have been advanced without there being any factual foundation in the pleadings for any such assertion at the bar. In the circumstances and especially in view of the statement made on behalf of the Administration that the water supply to the pond continues as before , we have no hesitation in holding that the allegation regarding disconnection of the water supply needs notice only to be rejected. 8. That brings us to Civil Writ Petition No. 8348 of 2009 in which too the subject matter of the proceedings happens to be the very same area. The petitioners grievance in the said petition, inter-alia, is that setting up of a Butterfly park may not be an ideal concept for the area in question. 8. That brings us to Civil Writ Petition No. 8348 of 2009 in which too the subject matter of the proceedings happens to be the very same area. The petitioners grievance in the said petition, inter-alia, is that setting up of a Butterfly park may not be an ideal concept for the area in question. More importantly, petitioner No. 2 in the said petition appears to be having an obvious personal interest in filing the said petition in as much as he intends to carry on his activities as President of the Environment Society of India in the said area, where he appears to have kept some ducks and a few cages for them. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the said petition that the proposed Butterfly park will not only displace petitioner No. 2 society but also result in removal of fruit trees nursery which is also being run in the neighbourhood. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties to this petition also at some length and after perusing the record, we are of the view that the petitioners have not made out any case for our interference with the proposed Butterfly Park in the area. We say so because the existing conditions in and around the area do not appear to be all that conducive to the continuance of the area without any further development. A report submitted by the Conservator of Forests dated 10.2.2009 to Secretary, Forest, a copy whereof has been enclosed as Annexure P-2 to the writ petition, suggests that the area in question was inspected on 4.2.2009 by the Conservator of Forests only to find that there was no fencing around the area which made it highly prone to encroachments. It is also noticed that lot of fruit trees which are at fruiting stage, are also growing and are prone to damage by intruders in the absence of any fencing around the area. The water body which the petitioners describe as a place of heritage also requires to be maintained as it has in its present state been described "as a water pond having dirty water" with few cages in which some Ducks have been kept by petitioner No. 2 Society. The Conservator of Forests has in that view proposed that the area needs to be secured by putting a fence on the periphery. 10. The Conservator of Forests has in that view proposed that the area needs to be secured by putting a fence on the periphery. 10. The report made by the Conservator of Forests also appears to be based on the discussion with Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun which is said to be possessing necessary expertise on Butterflies and can provide technical know- how for the establishment of a Butterfly Park. The proposal for development of the area as a Butterfly Park and for small Interpretation Centre referred to in the report made by the Conservator of Forests does not appear to us to be an unachievable target so as to call for our interference in exercise of our writ jurisdiction. Suffice it to say that the questions whether a Butterfly Park is an ideal project for the area? whether fencing is necessary around the area? and whether the area needs to be cleared from encroachments and improvements brought above in the same and if so the extent and the nature of the improvements, are all the matters which are better left to the wisdom of the Administration. We would not, therefore, like to interfere with the ongoing project of the Administration so long as it does not intend to convert it into an institute for the officers as was alleged by the petitioners. for developing the area whether as a Butterfly Park or as an Interpretation Centre for the said park as proposed by the Conservator of Forests. 11. In the result, both these petitions are dismissed. We hope and trust that the Administration shall take steps and measures that would enhance the beauty of the area as a green and natural spot with a water body to preserve the flora and fauna of the region. No costs.