IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2978 of 2009 Indrajeet Singh, S/o-Late Ramashish Singh, resident of Village-Basantpatti, P.S.-Purnahiya, District-Sheohar. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Collector, Sheohar. 3. Addl. Collector, Sheohar. 4. Anchal Adhikari, Purnahiya, District-Sheohar. 5. Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Sheohar. -Respondents. ----------- 03 04.12.2009 The State Government had decided to set up a Primary Health Centre in village-Purnahia, Block & P.S.-Purnahiya in the district of Sheohar. No government land was there. One Rambriksh Pathak, S/o-Nageshwar Pathak agreed to donate 0.65 decimals of his land in village-Purnahiya for the said purpose. He made an application to the Collector for permission to register deed of conveyance in favour of State of Bihar for this purpose without payment of fees and other charges. The Collector, Sheohar by his letter dated 11.06.2008 noticing the purpose for which land was to be donated granted the permission. Accordingly, by a registered gift deed, - 2 - which was registered on 11.02.2009, Rambriksh Pathak donated 65 decimals of land, which was valued at about Rs.14.30 lacs to the State Government for establishment of the Primary Health Centre at the site so selected and approved by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Sheohar. It may be specifically noted here that the said Rambriksh Pathak had earlier donated contiguous land for establishment of the Block Office on which Block Office was later constructed and is functional. Once the tender for construction was finalized, it appears suddenly someone appeared before the Collector, Sheohar and pointed out that so far as the land donated by Rambriksh Pathak is concerned, he has no clear title and that person was ready to donate land for the same purpose in village-Sonaul Sultan, though under Purnahiya Block and Police Station. On 24.02.2009, the Collector, Sheohar granted permission to execute deed of conveyance in that - 3 - regard by Srinath Prasad Singh and the deed of conveyance having then been executed. Not having been protested by Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Sheohar, the Collector, Sheohar directed the site of Primary Health Centre should be shifted from village-Purnahiya to village-Sonaul Sultan. Petitioner is a resident of Purnahiya Block and objects to the manner in which this decision has been taken. It is submitted that when the said Rambriksh Pathak donated substantial land for establishment of the Block Office is peacefully functioning. When he donated further contiguous land for the Primary Health Centre after all selection suddenly the Collector, who was aware of these facts now chooses to deem the site to be a disputed site though not one person has come forward to dispute and using that as a pretext order for transfer of the site to decide the village away form habitation. Petitioner submits that - 4 - Primary Health Centre should be at inhabited place. The site earlier given was next to the Block Office near the Police Station and in village Purnahiya itself. Whereas the site is now shifted is more than two kilometers away in a desolated place with no place in the immediate vicinity. It would be highly inconvenient for the people of the Block to visit the same. In some and substance, what is submitted is, the Primary Health Centre is for the benefit of individual but not for the benefit of the community. The first site was for the benefit of the community, the second site is for the benefit of an individual, who is interested in seeing some habitation in his barren land. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, who this Court appears to be a competent authority to decide location of a Primary Health Centre, has virtually protested in his counter affidavit to this Court. He has categorically pointed out that establishing a Primary - 5 - Health Centre far away from the Block headquarters in a sparsely populated area would not be in interest of larger people. The counter affidavit of the Civil Surgeon, who had earlier selected the site, supports the averments of the petitioner. In my view, these facts are important facts, which have been totally ignored by the Collector, Sheohar. When he took the decision to order for shifting of site he forgot that the Block Office functions on land donated by Rambriksh Pathak, which is adjacent in the same plot of land. Block Office functions peacefully. It is not said as to who took an objection and if anyone took an objection why the said donor was not first heard before ordering shifting of the site. Merely because of some ipse dixit facts brought on record by some interested person, the site could not be shifted. More so, when it is a question of public convenience of which the Civil Surgeon was the best judge - 6 - even the Civil Surgeon was not taken into confidence. Thus, in my view, this requires reconsideration by the Collector in true perspective of the fact, as noted above. Further work shall remain stayed at the new site, till a fresh decision in the matter taken by the Collector after notice to all concerned. Let it be recorded that this is an approach not for the benefit of Collector or for the benefit of an individual but for the benefit of public at large. The Collector should take decision in the matter within a period of one month from the date of production of this order before him. With these observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)