- (1.) THE petition has been filed in public interest to safeguard and protect two public parks and a green belt in Kanpur Nagar. The immediate cause of action was a letter addressed by the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Kanpur on 1 September 2014 to the Collector and District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar indicating the consent of the Municipal Commissioner for establishing three power sub -stations in each of the three locations. The parks in question are situated at (i) Block -E, Gujaini; (ii) Salt Factory Chauraha (green belt); and (iii) Block -K, Kidwai Nagar Sheodham Park.
(2.) THERE is no dispute before the Court that the lands in question are respectively earmarked either as parks or as a green belt in the master plan. The Municipal Commissioner in paragraph 8 of his counter has stated that his no objection was sought because the lands in question were either in the nature of a green belt or a park which have been vested in the Nagar Nigam for maintenance. Kanpur Electric Supply Company Limited(KESCO) made requisitions for construction of sub -stations, upon which the district administration submitted a report dated 8 August 2014 identifying these lands. The Municipal Commissioner, granted his no objection on 1 September 2014. The Kanpur Development Authority(KDA) granted its no objection on 9 January 2015.
(3.) WHEN the petition came up before this Court on 19 March 2015, this Court observed that a public park is intended to be utilised as an amenity for the purposes of recreation for members of the public. Moreover, merely because land in public parks is available, that was held not to be a valid ground to permit the utilisation of such land for other purposes. The use which is earmarked in the master plan would have to be strictly adhered to and the land cannot be earmarked for any other purpose. In an earlier judgment of this Court in Km Zoya Junaid Vs State of U P (Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No 26294 of 2014) this Court observed, while adverting to the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Parks, Playgrounds and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulations) Act, 1975, as follows: "Public parks, playgrounds and open spaces constitute a valuable facet of the environment. The right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution incorporates within it the right to a clean and healthy environment including in the urban areas of the country where there is a rapid decline in the quality of the environment and the State is no exception. There is a rapid deterioration of the environment and open spaces and recreational areas are becoming rapidly extinct. Rampant development is threatening the existence of gardens and recreational areas which constitute the lungs of the cities. Article 48 -A which forms part of the Directive Principles of State policy requires the State to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country. Similarly, Article 51 -A incorporates a fundamental duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment. The enactment of the State Legislation, which we have referred to earlier, for the preservation and reservation of parks, playgrounds and open spaces is in relation to the fundamental right to have a clean and healthy environment under Article 21 and an acknowledgment of the obligation which is cast upon the State by the Directive Principles of State policy. Hence, there can be no manner of doubt that an area which is earmarked as a playground, park or open space cannot be utilized for any other extraneous purpose. Secondly, we are categorically of the view that it would not be open for the State to allow a public park or playground, as in the present case, to be commercialised by permitting the holding of such exhibitions. However, insofar as the present year is concerned, the Court cannot be oblivious to the fact that at present though a considerable amount of public money has been spent on the beautification of the Company Garden including the levelling of the land, the construction of a boundary wall and a walking path, but it is still not fully developed. The petitioners have come before the Court when barely a few weeks are left for the holding of the exhibition." ;