IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 5065 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : 25.11.2008 Satish Saini .... PETITIONER Versus Municipal Committee, Safidon and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjay S. Chauhan, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Sudhir Makkar, Senior DAG, Haryana, for respondent No.3. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The petitioner, who is resident of Safidon, Tehsil and District Jind, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the resolution dated 23.1.2008, passed by respondent No.1 - the Municipal Committee, Safidon (hereinafter referred to as `the respondent Committee'); as well as the order dated 18.3.2008, whereby the Deputy Commissioner, Jind, in exercise of the powers under Section 246 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), has affirmed the said resolution. Separate written statements on behalf of respondents No.1 and CWP No. 5065 of 2008 -2- 2 and respondent No.3 have been filed in Court today. The same are taken on record and copies thereof have been furnished to counsel for the petitioner. In brief, it is case of the petitioner that the respondent Committee was running a library in its building situated at Safidon for the last over 50 years. In the year 1986, the said building was renovated. After the renovation, the said library continued in the same premises. It is the further case of the petitioner that in the year 2005, the respondent Committee decided to demolish the said building in order to re-construct a double storey building. According to the petitioner, it was decided that ground floor of the newly constructed building would consist of shops, which was be let out for the income of the respondent Committee and the upper storey would consist of Municipal Office and library hall. According to the said decision, in the year 2006, the old building was demolished and the double story building, consisting of shops on the ground floor and office of the respondent Committee and the library hall on the first floor was constructed. It is further case of the petitioner that in due course of time, all the shops on the ground floor were let out. The office of the respondent Committee was also shifted to the first floor, whereas the place of the library hall was kept vacant on one pretext or the other. In spite of the representation made by the petitioner and the other residents, the respondent Committee did not establish the library in the said hall. Rather, it decided to let out the said portion. Accordingly, the tenders were invited and vide the CWP No. 5065 of 2008 -3- impugned resolution, the offer given by the Life Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as `the LIC') was accepted and the said hall was given on lease to it for 9 years. Feeling aggrieved against the said resolution, the petitioner filed an application before the Deputy Commissioner, with a prayer not to confirm the said resolution, in exercise of his powers under Section 246 of the Act. On the said application, the petitioner and the respondent Committee were heard and the said resolution was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner, while coming to the decision that no library was earlier running in the respondent Committee building and the respondent Committee, who is in a weak financial position, has validly let out the said hall by inviting the tenders and by following due procedure. The said decision of the respondent Committee is in its best interest. This order of the Deputy Commissioner has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the impugned resolution as well as the order, we do not find any merit in the instant petition. Undisputedly, the building in question, which has been let out to the LIC, is owned by the respondent Committee. The respondent Committee, by following the rules, leased out the said premises for a period of 9 years, by inviting applications from the various interested persons. LIC gave the highest offer, which was accepted by the respondent Committee and the said premises was let out. As per the observations made by the CWP No. 5065 of 2008 -4- Deputy Commissioner in the impugned order, the petitioner has failed to place on record any material to show that in the old building, the respondent Committee was running any library. It is the positive case of the respondent Committee that neither any fund was ever allocated for library nor any book was purchased. It is the further case of the respondent Committee that in the old building, no library was being run by it. Taking into consideration these facts, the Deputy Commissioner, while exercising his powers under section 246 of the Act, has confirmed the resolution dated 23.1.2008, passed by the respondent Committee, by coming to the conclusion that the said decision was taken in accordance with law and in the best interest of the respondent Committee. In our opinion, if the Deputy Commissioner is satisfied that the resolution passed by the respondent Committee is in accordance with the provisions of the Act, Rules and Bye-laws of the Municipal Committee and in its best interest, then such decision does not require any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of the said satisfaction recorded after providing opportunity of hearing to both the parties, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner does not require any interference by this Court. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE November 25, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) ndj JUDGE