RAFIQ, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition styled as public interest litigation has been filed at the instance of Vyapar Mandal Samiti, Mansarovar, through its President Mahendra Joshi.
(2.) CHALLENGE has been posed to the notice (Annexure-4) issued by Rajasthan Housing Board for auction of the land in dispute situated in Sector 4 of Mansarovar Colony of Jaipur. According to the petitioner, this land was originally reserved for senior higher secondary school and is now being sought to be auctioned without following the procedure for change of its land use for the purpose of its commercial use. Mr. Madhav Mitra, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the plot in dispute opens on New Sanganer Road and is surrounded by three schools, one of which is running for last almost 8 years. The petitioner Samiti came to know that the respondents wanted to use the land in question for commercial purpose, whereas the said land should have been used for setting up market yard for grains and vegetables, which need is being felt by residents of Mansarovar Colony, the largest residential colony in Asia since long. It is argued that the residents of the area are facing great difficulty in procuring vegetables and grains for their use in the colony itself. It is therefore prayed that the auction notice be set aside and the respondents be directed to keep the land in dispute reserved for the school or in the alternative make use of the same for setting up the market yard of grains and vegetables. Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the Housing Board and Mr. Sanjay Srivastava, learned Deputy Government Counsel however, opposed the writ petition. Mr. A. K. Gupta argued that the present writ petition cannot be treated as public interest litigation as it has been filed by Vayapar Mandal Samiti for its own benefit which is evident from the relief prayed for. It has been argued that the petitioner Samiti is not a representative body, nor is it a registered the use of the land from school to commercial after following the relevant law. The proposal for such change in the land use was made by Deputy Commissioner (Division II), Mansarovar and was considered by the Project Committee in its 95th meeting held on 24. 3. 2004 along with 25 other matters. The Project Committee consists of Chairman, Rajasthan Housing Board, Commissioner, Rajasthan Housing Board, Chief Town Planner, Government of Rajasthan, Chief Engineer, Rajasthan Housing Board, Additional Chief Engineer, Rajasthan Housing Board and Senior Town Planner, Rajasthan Housing Board. The Project Committee considered the fact that Mansarovar being the largest residential scheme of Asia was established in the year 1982 and now has taken the complete shape. Number of land pockets of various use within the scheme have remained unutilized and day to day it is becoming difficult for the Housing Board to save these pockets from encroachment. The Project Committee was of the view that the revision in lay out plan proposed by the Dy. Commissioner of Housing Board to make use of the said plot for commercial use, which is opening on 60 meter wide road be allowed. The Project Committee therefore approved the proposal at its agenda item No. 22. Mr. A. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent-Housing Board argued that the auction of the land shall be made by inviting open bids. There is therefore no illegality in the action of the respondents.
(3.) WE have given our anxious consideration to the arguments made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. While it is a fact that plot in question was reserved for the use of school, but ever since the colony was set up in the year 1982, this pot has been lying vacant. The respondents now have decided to make use of the same for commercial complex. The matter has been processed and brought before the Project Committee which is competent to permit the revision of the original use, of course, with the approval of the State Government. While use of the land for the school is a public purpose, at the same time, commercial complex in the present times also is a utility for use of the general public. Though there may be some substance in what petitioner contends that the area in question may also require grain and vegetable market, yet on that basis alone, this Court cannot hold the action of the respondents in deciding to have a commercial complex on the disputed plot as either against the law or opposed to public interest. If the petitioner and for that matter, other residents of the area, have any grievance with regard to non-availability of a market yard, especially for sale of grains and vegetables, it is for them to raise their grievance before the Rajasthan Housing Board and the State Government. In the face of competing public interests namely; school, commercial complex and the grain and vegetable market, it is essentially for the respondents to decide as to for which one of them, they want to utilise this land. This Court cannot in exercise of its power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India set the priorities for the respondents. We do not find any reason to interfere with the action of the respondents. We, however, dismiss the writ petition with the observations referred to above. . ;