MILK COLONY SPORTS CLUB Vs. COMMISSIONER AND M/S. BRIGADE ENTERPRISES LIMITED REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has, by way of public interest litigation, raised number of grievances in respect of construction being carried out over an area of open space in Malleshwaram area, which as a playground was earlier in charge of the petitioner as Secretary of Milk Colony Sports Club. It is claimed that the petitioner used to manage the playground and it was used as a stadium for conducting different types of games and he used to give permission to conduct such games and activities. On 15.03.2006, the petitioner had issued a letter on behalf of general public, requesting the Commissioner of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to develop the playground for the use of general public and to convert it as a mini stadium to conduct indoor games and other sports. According to the petition, there was stay of the Hon'ble Supreme Court operating against that development. The grievance of the petitioner is that, it has now come to his knowledge that BBMP has given a contract to conduct development work upon the same playground to respondent No. 2 and such work is already underway, but it is contrary to the plan and sketch issued by the petitioner on behalf of general public. Therefore, the petitioner filed an application under the Right to Information Act on 12.02.2013 asking details of the construction. On that basis, it is alleged that respondent No. 2 has been trying to convert this playground for their own use and occupation. A further grievance is made to the effect that respondent No. 2 has been preventing access to the general public and even charging entry fees for the use of a gym, which has come up at the place. It is therefore alleged that respondent No. 1 has been adopting unjustifiable methods to help respondent No. 2. It is also alleged in the grounds for the petition that BBMP has not issued any tender notification, that respondent No. 2 is a private real estate company and they are constructing walking track, which is not necessary. Ultimately, it is prayed in the petition that directions may be issued to the respondents to restore the schedule -land as playground and open space with unrestricted right of use and entry for the general public. A further prayer is made in the following terms: -.

(2.) THE above extracted gist of the petition would clearly show the extent to which the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court could be put to test in the name of general public and even in absence of any factual or legal basis. Upon learned counsel for the petitioner being asked to point out the legal provisions on the basis of which right of the general public in respect of the playground or open space was claimed and in respect of the alleged violation of any legal provisions, the only provision cited in support of all the vague and rambling arguments was Section 8 of the Karnataka Parks, Play -fields and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation) Act, 1985, which reads as under: -