LAWS(P&H)-2013-9-232

GURUDWARA HAR DARSHAN SAHIB Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On September 18, 2013
Gurudwara Har Darshan Sahib Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for quashing the letter of intent dated 23.10.2009, Annexure P.5 issued in favour of respondent No. 4 -Chief Khalsa Diwan, G.T. Road, Near Rigo Bridge, Amritsar, allotting it a religious site measuring 1000 square yards in Sector 48 -C, Mohali, being in violation of the terms and conditions of the brochure, Annexure P.2. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy, as narrated in the "petition, may be noticed. The petitioner is a religious/social body duly registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Shri Kulbir Inder Singh Mann is its President. It is performing various religious and social activities for the general welfare, harmony and brotherhood of the residents of Mohali. In September 2007, respondent No. 2 -Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) issued an advertisement inviting applications for religious sites for setting up of temple, Gurdwara, Masjid etc. on leasehold basis in Urban Estate, SAS Nagar. The scheme opened on 14.9.2007 and was to be closed on 15.10.2007. As per the conditions of the advertisement, Annexure P.3, the allotment of sites was to be determined on the basis of the population of the concerned religious community in the area. It was further provided that allotment of the land to religious bodies was to be made if there was a demand by the local residents and there was no religious place of the concerned religion in that area. The petitioner applied for allotment of a two kanal site for Gurudwara earmarked for Sector 48 -C, Mohali vide application form dated 13.10.2007 alongwith all the necessary documents as required. Besides the petitioner, two other institutions namely Chief Khalsa Diwan, Amritsar, respondent No. 4 and one Chadha Motor Transport Charitable Trust Society, Amritsar also applied for allotment of Gurudwara site earmarked in Sector 48 -C, Mohali. Vide letter dated 1.9.2008, Annexure P.4, the petitioner was called for interview on 16.9.2008 alongwith all the relevant documents. The petitioner through its authorised representative appeared before the Scrutiny Committee/Allotment committee on the said date. The Scrutiny committee instead issued letter of intent dated 23.10.2009 for allotment of religious site in favour of respondent No. 4. According to the petitioner, the application of respondent No. 4 was incomplete since no bank statement as required was attached with it. Moreover, as per decision taken in the meeting dated 17.8.2009 under the Chairmanship of Chief Administrator, preference was to be given to the local institute and the petitioner being a local institute should have been given preferential right. Aggrieved by the action of the official respondents in allotting the site in favour of respondent No. 4, the petitioner has approached this Court through the present petition.

(2.) WRITTEN statement has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3 by Ms. Manisha Trighatia, Additional Chief Administrator, GMADA, wherein it has been, Inter -alia, stated that respondent No. 4 -Chief Khalsa Dewan was set up in the year 1902 with annual budget of Rs. 22 crores. It has over 600 members/affiliated units all over the country and is financially very sound. At the time of interview, complete set of documents alongwith details about their institutions including the income tax exemption etc. were submitted by respondent No. 4 which were duly considered by the Scrutiny committee. It was also stated that petitioner society did not have affiliation with any State level religious body, Respondent No. 4 being considered better, letter of intent was issued in its favour. On these premises, prayer for dismissal of the petition has been made.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the annexure appended by respondent No. 4 at Page 90 of the paper book, it was specifically stated that respondent No. 4 was "the caste based society". Learned counsel referred to eligibility condition in the brochure which reads as under: - -