IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14107 of 2002 1. Vinay Shankar Yadav, son of Late D.N.Prasad, resident of village-Gajadharganj, P.S.- Buxar (Town),District- Buxar, at present C/O Suresh Prasad Malakar, Mohalla-Sohani Patti, Ward No.23, Buxar. 2. Suresh Prasad Malakar, son of Murli Prasad Malakar, resident of Mohalla-Sohani Path, Ward No.23, Mohipal Pokhar, P.S.-Buxar (Town), District- Buxar. 3. Rama Shankar Chauhan, son of Late Sri Kishun Chauhan, resident of Mohalla-Sohani Patti, Ward No.23, Mahipal Pokhar, P.S.-Buxar (Town), District-Buxar. ………………Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Magistrate, Buxar, P.S.-Buxar, District-Buxar. 3. Executive Officer, Buxar Nagar Parishad, P.S.-Buxar (Town), District- Buxar. 4. Managing Director, Bihar State Water Resources Board, Vishwash Board, West Boring Canal Road, Patna. ……………..Respondents For the Petitioners : Mr. Jagdish Prasad For the Respondent no.4 : Mr. Indrajeet Singh For the State : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, S.C.-16 ________________________ 7 8.03.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, for the respondent no.4 and for the State. The petitioners seek a direction upon the respondents not to construct the Public Latrine in Mohalla-Sohani Patti, Ward No.23 where the houses of the petitioners are located. The short facts of the case are that the petitioners have constructed their houses in Plot No.840, 841 and 842 and also in old Survey Plot No.3219 since long and there is a piece of land 2 bearing Plot No.799 which is situated just in front of the houses of the petitioners and which is a Gairmajurua Aam land under the Buxar Nagar Parishad. The respondents started construction of public latrine over the said land. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have approached this Court. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are not against the construction of public latrine but that it should have been constructed away from the densely populated area and also away from the houses of the petitioners and others. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent no.4 Bihar Rajya Jal Parishad which has filed a counter affidavit, shall be constructing the public latrine which will be required to be maintained by the Buxar Nagar Parishad, but taking the plea of insufficiency of fund, the other public latrines existing in the town are not being properly maintained by the Nagar Parishad leading to pollution; once the present public toilet is built up in the present area it would become impossible for the petitioners to live there. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that there is a Mahavir Temple and School adjacent to the said place where the public latrine is being built up and the children attending the school as well as those going to the temple would be adversely affected by the existence of the said public latrine. Learned counsel for the respondent no.4 on the other hand submits that the Bihar Rajya Jal Parishad is constructing the said latrine for a public purpose with a view to keep the environment clean and for the benefit of the local people. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that the site where it is being constructed in not a densely populated area. It is the stand that the scheme has been sanctioned under the Ganga Action Plan, Phase-II by the National 3 River Conservation Department and its construction would go a long way for the benefit of the people of Buxar to keep the town clean. A sketch map of the area has also been annexed as Annexure-B/4 to the counter affidavit and referring to the same, it is stated that the site is in no way obstructing the temple or the school. It is also contended by learned counsel for the respondent no.4 that it is evident from the said sketch map that the area is not densely populated and there are just a few houses of these petitioners and one or two others in the said area and the rest are open fields of cultivated land and thus the site is not at all unsuitable for the construction of the proposed public latrine. On considering of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and submission of learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that the public latrine is not being constructed in a densely populated area as is wrongly contended as by the petitioners. The sketch map annexed on the basis of the direction of this Court by its order dated 21.02.2003 also shows that it is practically an open area with just a few houses. Even the School and Temple are located at a sufficient distance from the place where the public latrine is proposed to be constructed. Moreover, this Court also finds that sufficient explanation has been given for constructing the public toilet in Sohani Patti Mohalla instead of Khalasi Mohalla as the land available in the latter area was only 50 ft. X 30 ft. whereas the requirement is of 50ft. X 70 ft. This Court is also of the view that the construction of public toilets is a measure of public welfare and merely because a few persons claim to be inconvenienced by the same, the construction of such public toilets cannot be stopped, keeping in view the benefit to the large number of members of the public who do not 4 have access to such toilet; absence of such public latrines in fact leads to public nuisance being committed in any open area. Further, the selection of site for the construction of such public toilets cannot be made for the convenience of a few individuals like the petitioners and it is for the public authorities to take decision on such matters keeping in view all aspects. The same has been done in the present matter and there does not appear to be any malice towards the petitioners while making selection of the present site. In the light of aforesaid discussions, there is no merit in this writ application and it is, accordingly, dismissed. Needless to say, the interim order dated 21.02.2003 stands vacated. V.K. Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)