R.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have sought the review of the order dated 14 -2 -2008, passed by this Court, wherein this Court had observed as under: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners by way of Public Interest Litigation alleging that the area earmarked for woodland was getting disturbed on account of setting up of petrol pump and converting the area into a commercial complex. A show cause notice was issued to the respondents including the Rajasthan Housing Board as the area in dispute lies within the jurisdiction of the Rajasthan Housing Board. The Rajasthan Housing Board has filed counter affidavit along with the additional affidavit stating therein that the woodland area, which was earlier shown to be raised in Sector 8, Zone 80, which was situated on the left side, is now going to be shifted on the right side and the land on the left hand side would be used for commercial purpose. In view of the reply filed by the respondent - -Housing Board, no cause of action survives for the petitioners to press this writ petition. The writ petition be treated as disposed of in view of the reply filed by the respondent - -Housing Board, indicating the change but retaining the woodland.
(2.) IT was the petitioner's case that in Sector 8, Zone 80 of Agrawal Farm, Mansarovar, Jaipur there is a public facility area known as "woodland". The area had been ear -marked as woodland, ever since the Government acquired the land, and the Rajasthan Housing Board (for short 'RHB') started its housing scheme for Mansarovar Housing Colony. According to the scheme, the woodland covered a total area of 2.5 bighas. This woodland is essential not only for ensuring the greenery of the area, but also to prevent environmental pollution created by urban living. The area of the woodland has been developed for the last twenty -two years. It is utilised by the residents for their physical exercises, by the children for their games, and by the people, in general, for its aesthetic beauty. However, without any rhyme or reason, and in utter violation of laws governing urban planning, the Government had decided to construct a petrol pump and a commercial complex within the woodland area. Since the petitioners were alarmed by the possibility of a petrol pump and commercial complex being constructed in the woodland area, they filed the writ petition as a public interest litigation before this Court. The petitioners had not only questioned the wisdom of the Government on the ground that it would adversely affect the residents, but also questioned it on the ground that there are other commercial land available within the vicinity, which can be utilised for construction of the petrol pump and the commercial complex. Moreover, the construction of proposed petrol pump and commercial complex near educational institutions, like Maharshi Arvind Institute of Technology, the Central School No. 5, and the Cambridge Court High School, would adversely affect the educational institutions in the area. Thus the petitioners raised following legal issues: Whether RHB has the power to change the nature of the woodland - -a public facility service area or not? Whether the procedure has been followed by the RHB or not? What would be the impact of such a change on the locality? Whether such a change is reasonable, just and fair? Whether it would adversely affect the civil rights/fundamental rights of the residents or not? The RHB in its additional affidavit, in counter to the rejoinder filed by the petitioners, claimed that "it had not curtailed the woodland area". It had merely "shifted the woodland area from one side to the other".
(3.) BASED on the impression that the woodland area has not been reduced, and under the impression that woodland area has merely been shifted from one side to the other, this Court had passed the aforesaid order.;