A SRINIVAS Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition was filed by the petitioner who was practising as Chartered Accountant praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring G.O. Ms. No.194 dated 19-10-2000 issued by the Secretary to the Government of A.P., Youth Advancement, Tourism and Culture Department as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same and to pass appropriate orders that may be deemed fit in the circumstances of the case.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner challenged the action of the respondents in seeking to establish the commercial ventures like theatre, shopping complex etc., in the park known as NTR Gardens, opposite to Hussain Sagar lake. The Government had earlier taken a decision to declare 55 acres of Buddha Purnima Project area as NTR Gardens in 1996 vide GO 44 dated 2-2-1996. Subsequently, this area was developed into a full-fledged park investing huge amount of public money. When this park area was sought to be developed for other purposes, a public interest litigation was filed and this Court delivered the decision in S.R. Ramanujam v. Chief Secretary to Government, 1997 (3) ALD 114 = 1997 (2) ALT 512, wherein it was held that public park shall not be used for any other purposes. The petitioner relied on the decisions in Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa, AIR 1991 SC 1902 and M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Radhey Shyam Sahu, 1996 (6) SCC 464 and a decision of this Court in WP No.4598 of 2000 wherein it has been made clear that the park should not be used for any other purposes. It is submitted that the constructions are taking place on and near the water body of the Hussain sagar lake and that the Government issued G.O. Ms. No.194, dated 19-10-2000 under which two acres of the land is being given away for the commercial use to the fourth respondent. It is submitted that the diversion of part of public park for commercial venture is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as it affects lung space in the already congested city of Hyderabad and that by this action, the lake which is already polluted will further be polluted with this venture as more vehicles and other commercial activities will increase on a large scale. According to the petitioner, the construction of the theatre complex and allied commercial activities at this place is not in the interest of the general public and it does not serve any public purpose at the cost of green garden and much needed lung space. It is further submitted that no public objections were called for before issuing the GO and the subject GO converting garden into concrete jungle was also not published for the information of the public. The GO is issued scrumptiously with an intention to avoid public gaze and scrutiny. It is further submitted that this action of the respondents in carving out 2 acres from NTR Gardens for creation of commercial activity is against the principle of sustainable development and precautionary principle. So far no clearance was given by the Pollution Control Board and even if the Board clears it, the park area can never be converted into a commercial venture. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court in public interest to prevent the action of the Government in proceeding with the construction and commercial activities in the park area.

(3.) Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has also filed copies of the G.O.44, Municipal Admn., and Urban Development Department dated 2-2-1996, G.O. Ms. No.194 dated 19-10-2000 issued by the Youth Advancement, Tourism and Culture Department, Government of A.P. The Counsel for the petitioner has also filed copies of the judgments in CC No.1752 of 2000, CC No.1156 of 2001, WP No.3860 of 1996 as annexures.