M/S Traders And Properties Owners Association (Regd.) vs State Of Punjab And Others

Sanjiv Berry, J

The petitioner association claiming itself to be a public spirited body has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India claiming the same to be a public interest litigation seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside the allotment of land measuring 4927.33 sq. yds. in Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana to respondent No.3 as it had completely violated the terms and conditions of the allotment with impunity and played a fraud upon the State.

In nutshell, the case put-forth by the petitioner-Association is that respondent No.3 came into existence on the basis of Trust Deed dated 14.11.1983 and prior thereto, it was a duly registered Society. Respondent No.2 allotted the land in the most prime area and location of the city of Ludhiana to respondent No.3 for the purpose of utilizing the same strictly for propagating ideals and teachings of late Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru/ running an educational institution for such purposes. However, no charitable purpose is being done by respondent No.3 and entire property is being used as a commercial property in violation of terms and conditions of allotment, but no action has been taken against him on account of political patronage. Large number of illegal constructions/shops have been raised in the premises, hence the writ petition.

Upon notice, the respondent put in appearance and contested the petition by filing respective replies, wherein inter alia the respondent has challenged the maintainability of the instant writ petition in the shape of Public Interest Litigation. It has been claimed that the allotment of land to respondent No.3 had been in accordance with law and duly approved by the competent authorities and subsequent constructions thereupon had also been in accordance with the by-laws and rules. Any deviation/ access construction not reflected in the original site-plan has since been compounded by the authorities in accordance with law, the latest being as recent as dated 02.04.2024 (Annexure R4/4).

3.1 It has been submitted that on 14.01.1985, respondent No.2 i.e. Improvement Trust Ludhiana, had transferred the scheme of Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana u/s 55 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 to the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana. Respondent No.3 has submitted the site plan in 1987 wherein construction of auditorium, canteen, Bank and shops were effected and the same was sanctioned by the Improvement Trust in its meeting dated 25.08.1987 vide letter dated 03.09.1987 (Annexure R4/2). Thereafter respondent No.3 constructed some more shops for which the requisite site-plan was sanctioned and NOC given to respondent No.3 vide resolution dated 20.06.1990. The subsequent plan submitted by respondent No.2 vide Annexure P4/2 was approved by Municipal Corporation Ludhiana vide resolution dated 05.07.1993 and thereafter the deviation in construction was compounded and approved on payment of ₹2,34,431 as compounding fee vide resolution dated 28.03.2024. It is the stand of respondent No.4 that they have not received any letter or notice from respondent No.2 regarding any violation committed by respondent No.3, therefore, no cause of action arises against the petitioner.

3.2 Similarly the respondent No.3 has also filed reply claiming that no violation of any construction by-laws has been made nor any violation of agreement has been made by it. Whatever construction has been raised by respondent No.3 is in accordance with law and the same stood duly approved by the competent authority. It is submitted that respondent No.3 had constructed shops, auditorium and building licensed to Bank from which it derived income to meet the financial requirements. All the receipts of income and expenditure are duly audited and the requisite tax has also been paid.

3.3 Respondent No.3 is giving various scholarships, awards and also organizes cultural activities, debates, declamations etc. as part of charitable activities, besides giving scholarships to the socially and economically challenged students. It has been submitted that over 24000 students have already benefited from such scholarships given by respondent No.3 amounting to more than 8.5 crores since inception of the trust. Around 1500 students were benefited from the scholarships each year and even the memorandum of understanding has been signed between respondent No.3 and Department of Rehabilitation & Welfare Section, Directorate of Indian Army Veterans (DIAV) for providing scholarships towards education of 100 children of soldiers who die in harness. It is also running a free school to provide free quality education to students of diverse socioeconomic backgrounds besides running vocational centers.

3.4 The answering respondent has actively engaged in propagating laudable objects and public welfare in accordance with ideals and teachings of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, for the purpose it was setup.

3.5 The petitioners have filed the instant writ petition for their personal motives without there being any public cause involved, hence prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

It is inter alia contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner-Association is working for the welfare of the Society and highlighted that the allotment of land was made to respondent No.3 for the purpose of propagating the ideals and teachings of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru but with the passage of time they have involved in commercial activities by raising constructions of shops etc. in the property in utter violation to the conditions of allotment (Annexure P-2). He also referred to the aims and objects of the society (Annexure P-1) and contended that as there has been violation by respondent No.3, as such, the instant writ petition be allowed by setting-aside the allotment of land.

Per contra, learned counsels for the contesting respondent Nos. 3 and 4 submits that the petition in form of Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable as the same has been filed by the petitioner for their personal interest and jealousy. The allotment of land to respondent No.3 was not disputed but it was submitted that the construction over the land has been made in accordance with the rules and by-laws and no unauthorized construction has been made. It is submitted that whatever income is derived from the property is duly audited and exclusively used for charitable purpose granting scholarship to the weaker sections of society providing free education to the needy and also conducting various vocational courses, cultural activities, debates, declamations, tests and even providing education to around 100 childrens of the soldiers of Indian Army who had died in harness.

They contend that the respondent No.3 is also actively involved in propagating the ideals and teachings of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru. All the activities carried out in the premises are in accordance with law and there has not been any violation, hence prayed for dismissal of the petition.

After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record, it is not disputed that the land was allotted by respondent No.2 Improvement Trust to respondent No.3 vide agreement (Annexure P-2) wherein the relevant clause No.15 raised by the petitioner is as under:-

"That land allotted to the Nehru Sidhant Kendra will be strictly utilized for the construction of the building in which arrangement will be made to propagate ideals and teachings of Late Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru/running an educational institution to propagate these ideals."

From the pleadings of contesting respondents and also perusing the documents (Annexure A-2), it transpires that the construction on the land has been made by respondent No.3 in accordance with law. It is evident from the reply submitted by respondent No.4 Municipal Corporation that the construction at the spot has been as per site-plan duly approved and whatever deviation or access construction was there the same has been compounded in accordance with law from time to time latest being dated 02.04.2024 (Annexure R4/4).

9.1 Besides, the reply filed by respondent No.2 clearly highlighted numerous social and charitable activities carried out in providing scholarships, free education, vocational courses to the socially and economically weaker sections, children of war veterans who died in harness and carrying out various declamations, debates etc. from time to time in order to propagate the ideals and teachings of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru. It is also on record that entire income and expenditure of the respondent No.3 is duly audited.

9.2 The petitioner has not brought on record any illegal or adverse activity carried out by the respondent No.3 in the said property which could be adverse to the teachings of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, nor could it controvert the specific version of respondent No.4 that the entire construction over the land is in accordance with rules and by-laws and the construction is duly approved by the competent authorities referring to the latest approval on 02.04.2024 (Annexure R4/4). Therefore, it transpires that the original allotment made by respondent No.2, of the land to respondent No.3 in the scheme which ultimately stood transferred to respondent No.4 in 1987, there has not been any issue raised by either the Improvement Trust, respondent No.2, or respondent No.4 who is managing the scheme till date regarding any violation by respondent No.3 of the conditions of the allotment and if there is any violation, the respondents No.2 and 3 may initiate action as per law.

9.3 The petitioners have not been able to establish any locus standi to raise such a dispute that too in the shape of public interest litigation by filing the instant petition, nor could they establish any public cause being involved in the instant petition such as human right violation, pollution, social welfare etc., so as to make out a case for interference of this Court in exercise of its powers of judicial review. The petitioners have failed to establish any public cause involved in the present petition.

Resultantly, in the light of above discussion we find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.

Pending application(s) if any, shall also stand disposed of.