NATH RAM BHAGAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been moved by three petitioners, who claim to be connected with the development of people belonging to scheduled caste/scheduled tribe and backward classes category. They have filed this writ petition in public interest.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the office of Jammu and Kashmir Scheduled caste/Scheduled tribes and backward classes development corporation (here-in-after referred to as "Corporation") was previously located in Gandhi Nagar, Jammu. The said location, according to the petitioners, was not accessible to the members of the scheduled caste and scheduled tribes people. On a demand made by them, the office was shifted at Krishna Nagar, Jammu, which according to the petitioners is a centrally located place. They also submitted that this location is nearer to the General bus stand and anybody coming from outside Jammu city easily reaches the office of the Corporation. The petitioners submit that the shifting of the office from Gandhi Nagar to Krishna Nagar was welcomed by the members of the community. The petitioners further submit that although the present location of the office of the Corporation is best suited to the people for whose benefit the Corporation has been created, the respondents want to shift it to Gandhi Nagar/ Shastri Nagar/Trikuta Nagar, and for this purpose, a notification was got published on 12-1-1995 in a local daily newspaper. The respondents want accommodation for their office in any of the said areas. A copy of the advertisement notice has been appended with a petitioner. The petitioners case is that the shifting of the office of the Corporation is being made only with a view to provide advantage and comfort to the officials of the Corporation, who mostly hail from Gandhi Nagar/Shastri Nagar/Trikuta Nagar areas which are the post localities of Jammu city. They further contend that shifting of the office in one of the said areas whill not be in the interest of scheduled caste/schedule tribe and backward classes category people, for whose benefit the Corporation was created. According to them, the petitioners and some other persons interested in the welfare of the schedule caste/scheduled tribes people made a representation before the respondents that the office of the Corporation should not be shifted from Krishna Nagar. They further submit that the shifting of office earlier from Gandhi Nagar to Krishna Nagar was done at a huge cost, and in case of shifting again, the corporation will again have a spend a lot of money and this amount shall be met from the funds of the Corporation, which are otherwise meant for the development of scheduled tribe/scheduled cast people. The petitioners also contend that the present location of the office of the Corporation has sufficient accommodation, as was verified by the Managing Director himself in the Board meeting of the Corporation held in the year 1993 They submit that the shifting of the complex from Gandhi Nagar to Krishna Nagar was also approved by the Board of the Corporation in its meeting held on 10-11-1993.

(3.) Objections have been filed by respondent No. 1. In this objections, the respondents submit that the petition is mis-conceived and not maintainable, as the petitioners have approached this Court in the garb of public interest litigation with an ulterior motive, which is to meet the vested interests of those persons who have no locus standi to file the petition. The respondents have further submitted that the only ground taken in the petition is alleged in-convenience to the people, and even if it is admitted that inconvenience will be caused to them, even then there is no cause for the writ petitioners to approach this Court in terms of Article 226 of the Constitution. The respondents have further submitted that the petitioners have suppressed the material facts in their petition and therefore, the same deserves dismissal. The respondents case is that ex. Financial Advisor of the Corporation entered into a conspiracy with one Mr. J. C. Raina who happened to be his relation, for housing theCorporation in his building at 285A Krishna Nagar and fixed a rent of Rs. 8,000/- Per Month for five rooms with penalty clause of rupees one lac in case the premises were vacated before the expiry of terms of lease which was five years. According to the respondents, this was done by Financial Advisor without any authority and without the consent of the Managing Director, and this act of the then Financial Advisor became responsible for his removal from the Corporation. The building at Krishna Nagar has only five rooms and the staff cannot be accomodated properly in this building, and therefore the work of the Corporation suffered badly, which resulted into trouble and in-convenience to socially backward people, for whose benefit the Corporation has been established. Therefore, a proposal was moved for acquiring suitable and better accomodation, which was approved by the Advisor to Governor, who is the Chairman of the Corporation. The respondents issued an advertisement in the newspapers and many offers were received, and one such offer was received from one Ramesh Gandotra whose building had been vacated by Jammu Development Authority after shifting to their own building. The proposal was examined and the building was found to be spacious enough to accomodate the office of the Corporation. It has fourteen rooms and the rent was negotiated at Rs. 9,000/- Per Month and the building was taken on lease w.e.f. l-3-199