LEWINGSTONE D. SANGMA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a resident of South Garo Hills and for setting up of a new Polytechnic at a location known as Kapasipara by the State respondents, he had donated a plot of land along with two other persons. The grievances as set forth is that after the petitioner had expressed his desire to donate the land as the same was found to be suitable but the State respondents suddenly took a decision for shifting of the Polytechnic from Kapasipara to Gasuapara, South Garo Hills. The writ petitioner is therefore, seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to revert to the land donated by him as the establishment of the Polytechnic Institute at Kapasipara would benefit and bring about development to the people of the area.

(2.) Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, learned AAG assisted by Ms. R. Colney, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 to 4 submits that the decision of the State respondents is a policy decision based on the suitability and feasibility of the plot donated by the petitioner, and in this regard an inspection was conducted, where it was found that the site was not suitable. Furthermore, it is submitted that the tender for construction of the new Polytechnic at Gasuapara had already been floated on 22/11/2018, and the same is under construction and substantial portion of the works have been completed. As such, the learned counsels for the respondents submit that no case has been made out for interference by this Court.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on examination of the materials on record, it is noted that there is nothing to show that the land of the writ petitioner had been taken-over by the State respondents or that any damage had been caused to warrant a claim for compensation. With regard to the shifting of the site, it appears that the decision was taken after due consideration and inspection, and as such nothing can be faulted with the decision making process or any arbitrariness be attributed to the same.