HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.10051 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.04.2011 **** Bohar Singh & Ors. . . . . Petitioners VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. CM Munjal, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Addl. AG Punjab for respondents No.1 to 3 Mr. PC Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.4 **** RANJAN GOGOI, C.J. (ORAL) (1). The challenge in the writ petition is against the resolution of the Municipal Council, Ferozepur City dated 13.12.2009 (Annexure P7) and the Government order dated 06.05.2010 (Annexure P8). According to the petitioner, the aforesaid resolution and Government order contemplates sale of a park on Mall Road, Ferozepur which is being run and managed by the Municipal Council. Tracing the long history of the park and the multiple uses to which the same has been put by CWP No.10051 of 2010.doc - 2 – successive generations, the petitioner has come forward to espouse the cause of the public by instituting this PIL wherein the principal relief sought is for a restraint of the sale of the park. (2). The Municipal Council has filed its affidavit in the case on 25.01.2011. Along with the said affidavit, a lay-out plan of what is proposed in and around the existing park has also been enclosed. According to the Municipal Council, the total area of the park including the green- belt is 1,35,872 sq.ft. and presently the actual area of park is 45,428 sq.ft. In the aforesaid lay-out plan, it has been stated that the area under the park is proposed to be increased to 49,350 sq.ft. and a part of the land abutting the Mall Road is proposed to be put to public auction to enable a Shopping Complex to develop. According to the Municipal Council, the funds generated by the aforesaid sale would be used for various infrastructural facilities particularly to make provisions for water, sewerage and other related works. (3). At the hearing, on instructions received, Mr. PC Goyal, counsel for the Municipal Council has stated that the total area of land proposed to be sold is only 13068 sq.ft. (4). The responsibility of running and managing its affairs and to provide civic amenities to the citizens is primarily CWP No.10051 of 2010.doc - 3 – vested in the Municipal Council. If the Municipal Council has taken a decision not only to maintain the park, including the green-belt, but also to enhance the area thereof and at the same time to sell a small parcel of the land to generate funds for various developmental activities, we do no see any reason why the Court should come in the way. Had the area of land proposed to be sold been sufficiently large and such sale was to be at the cost of the park adversely affecting the ecology and environment, surely, the Court would have stepped in on the ground that the rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution would stand abrogated by such action of the Municipal Council. However, in the present case, the situation is not so. The figures highlighted above would sufficiently indicate that the Municipal authorities are not unmindful of the need to preserve the ecology and environment by maintaining and enhancing the park. At the same, the Municipality is equally conscious of the need to manage its affairs, particularly, with regard to the surplus land in a more viable and organized manner. (5). In the light of what has been discussed above, we decline to cause any interference with the proposed actions of the Municipal Council who, however, would be bound by the terms noted earlier, namely, to preserve and enhance the CWP No.10051 of 2010.doc - 4 – area of the park to 49350 sq.ft. and to sell the land only to the extent of 13068 sq.ft. (6). With the aforesaid directions and observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. (RANJAN GOGOI) Chief Justice 19.04.2011 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) Judge