NIRMALJIT KAUR J. - (1.) THIS petition has been filed by way of Public Interest Litigation by the petitioners. A prayer has been made in the petition that a direction be given to the respondents not to construct the I.T.Centre over the disputed land marked 'ABCDE' shown in the site plan. Prayer has also been made to remove the construction and restore the land in its original position by reconstructing the Reservoir and Water Troughs shown by mark 'Z' in site plan.
(2.) IN the writ petition, it is averred that petitioners are the residents of village Balera. The well is situated over the land of Khasra No.121 area 0.15 biswa as per Jama Bandi, Annex.16 to the petition. Over the disputed land, Reservoir with Water troughs shown by mark 'Z' in site plan have been dismantled without permission of the PHED. While illegally constructing the I.T.Centre, the respondents have encroached upon Gair Mumkin Rasta upto width of 4 feet marked 'ABC' in the site plan. As per the information supplied by the PHED, no permission was obtained for dismantling the Reservoir and Water Troughs marked 'Z' in the site plan. Hence, the petition has been preferred on the ground that there is other alternative land available to the respondents for construction of the I.T.Centre under the Rules of 1963, called Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of unoccupied Govt. Agricultural Lands for the construction of Schools, Colleges, Dispensaries, Dharamshalas & other Buildings of Public Utility) 1963. Petitioners have also suggested suitable alternative place. Thus, prayer has been made to remove the construction and restore the land in its original position by reconstructing the Reservoir and Water Troughs shown by mark 'Z' in site plan. In the reply filed by the respondents No.2 and 3, it is contended that petitioners do not cater to public interest; the construction of the I.T.Centre is in the public interest and it would serve the public purpose i.e. for maintenance of the record of the employees of the 'Mahanarega', for imparting training to villagers of the village, for facilitating the depositions of the Government dues i.e. water and electricity, for arranging e- information with regard to the bonafide resident and birth-death certificate, for reservation of the tickets etc. The construction of the I.T.Centre is at a distance of near about 30 ft. from the Well and by construction of the I.T.Centre, the supply of water from the Well will not, in any manner, be disturbed. So far as the Ground Level Reservoir (GLR) is concerned, it has been mentioned that the GLR had been in use for 30 years, therefore, the same was in deteriorated condition and was un-serviceable. This report was given by the Asstt.Engineer, PHED, Sub Division Bidasar, which was duly approved by the Executive Engineer. The report Annex.R/1 has been filed with the return. The construction of the I.T.Centre is not on the land, meant for the way; the map of the site has been filed indicating that the road is separate; it would not be appropriate to order dismantling, particularly when the structure has already been raised substantially upto 50%. A rejoinder has been filed by the petitioners contending that since the land could not have been converted for construction of the I.T.Centre, dismantling of the GLR was illegal It can only be used & maintained for reconstruction of the GLR, which was dismantled illegally. The I.T.Centre has been raised illegally; it be ordered to be dismantled. Mr.A.K.Dhera, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has submitted that dismantling of the GLR was illegal, as such, it should be ordered to be restored back. He has further submitted that even if the civil suit & temporary injunction application have been filed by certain other persons in this matter but the same will not come in the way of maintaining this petition, as it has been filed in the larger public interest. Learned counsel has further submitted that the construction over the disputed land has been illegally raised, as the conversion of the land has not been ordered by the competent authority. Mr.Anand Purohit, AAG, has submitted that construction of the I.T.Centre is 30ft. away from the well and with respect to the Ground Level Reservoir, permission was granted by the PHED to dismantle it, as evident from the document filed with the return. It would not be appropriate to dismantle the I.T.Centre, which has been constructed in the public interest for providing various facilities to the villagers. He has also assured that the Ground Level Reservoir shall be constructed at the appropriate place for providing drinking water to the cattle of the village.
(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Well has not been disturbed. The construction of the I.T.Centre has been raised 30ft. away from the Well. Only the Ground Level Reservoir, which was in dilapidated condition, was dismantled. Such a structure shall be constructed at an appropriate place, as assured by Mr.Anand Purohit, AAG. We find that the construction of the I.T.Centre is in the public interest for providing various facilities to the villagers. Substantial amount of public money has already been spent and construction has been completed more than 50%. We find that no case is made out to make interference in the construction of the I.T.Centre. Resultantly, the Public Interest Litigation, being bereft of merits, is hereby dismissed. ;