BHANSALI,J. - (1.) THIS petition, styled as a Public Interest Litigation, has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of order dated 18.06.2012, whereby, the Municipal Council, Jaisalmer has granted permission to the District Collector, Jaisalmer for construction of various facilities on the vacant land ad measuring 50x70 square ft. situated on the North West side of the Poonam Stadium and has further sought a restraint against the respondents from raising construction in pursuance of the order dated 18.06.2012.
(2.) THE petition has been filed with the contentions that the petitioners are residents of Jaisalmer and petitioner No.1 is a Football Coach; Poonam Singh Stadium is the only Stadium in the Jaisalmer City, in which, playing activities are managed by the State Government and maintenance is being done by the Municipal Council, Jaisalmer; the Stadium is being used for morning and evening walk; reference has been made to the litigation instituted by the petitioner No.1 before the Permanent Lok Adalat and the order passed by the said Permanent Lok Adalat observing that the Stadium would not be misused, the State would make arrangements to see that anti social activities are not carried on in the Stadium. It is, thereafter, averred in the petition that on 11.06.2012, the State has issued letter regarding construction of certain facilities for public use in the premises of the Collectorate for the activities indicated therein. A letter dated 13.06.2012 was written by the Collector to the Municipal Council, Jaisalmer for giving consent for construction of the facilities indicated in the letter dated 11.06.2012 on a part of the vacant land comprised in the Stadium as there was lack of adequate space in the Collectorate. The consent was given by the Municipal Council on 18.06.2012, which is being questioned in the present writ petition as indicated hereinbefore. Several representations were made by the petitioners and other persons questioning the construction of the facilities at the site. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the State, District Collector, Jaisalmer and the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jaisalmer with the submissions that the Stadium is situated adjoining to the Collectorate premises and the Collector premises is housing 23 offices including District Court and Sub ordinate, Courts. The entry of the Stadium is from the opposite direction and the pavilion, track and field, which are being used for playing activities, are also in the center of the Stadium. The Stadium is also used for public functions and fares such as Cultural Programmes, National Day Functions, Maru Mahotsav etc. For the purpose of raising construction of Public Facility Centers, in terms of the sanction granted by the Government of Rajasthan in the Collectorate, on being searched, it was found that land adjoining the Collectorate in the rear portion of the Stadium (outside the pavilion) was lying unused and vacant and, therefore, a request was made to the Municipal Council, Jaisalmer seeking permission for raising construction and as an abandoned Basket Ball court was existing at the said place, it was decided in the larger public interest to construct the new and modern Basket Ball court on the vacant land nearby. It is submitted that the construction of the said facilities would not hamper/obstruct the sports or other activities. It is also been submitted that there exists another Indoor Stadium in Jaisalmer City named Indira Gandhi Indoor Stadium situated at Sam Road, Jaisalmer having indoor and outdoor facilities, such as Basket Ball court, Badminton court, Tennis court, Cricket ground etc. Certain photographs indicating the construction being raised as well as the existing position have also been filed.
(3.) A reply by respondent No.3 Municipal Council, Jaisalmer has also been filed and it has been indicated that the public facility center is being constructed to facilitate the visitors not only to those who visit Collectorate and other offices and courts, but also to the visitors, who visit the Stadium and the petition is in fact obstructing the larger public interest in place of espousing public cause. Averments made by the petitioners in the writ petition were denied and most of the averments made by the other respondents have been reiterated in the reply.;