LAWS(J&K)-1995-8-10

NATH RAM BHAGAT Vs. STATE

Decided On August 03, 1995
NATH RAM BHAGAT Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Respondents

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 Castes / Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes Development Corporation (hereinafter 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 Tribe people. On a demand made by them, the office was shifted to 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 the writ petition. 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 posh localities of Jammu city. They further contend that shifting of the office in one of the said areas will not be in the interest of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes 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 Scheduled Castes/ 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 to 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 his objections, the respondents submit that the petition is misconceived 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 inconvenience 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 Art. 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 the Corporation in his building at 285-A Krishna Nagar and fixed a rent of Rs. 8,000/- per month for five rooms with penalty clause ofrupees one lac in case the premises were vacated before the expiry of term 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 accommodated properly in this building, and therefore the work of the Corporation suffered badly, which resulted into trouble and inconvenience to socially backward people, for whose benefit the Corporation has been established. Therefore, a proposal was moved for acquiring suitable and better accommodation, 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 accommodate 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. 1-3-1995 When the Corporation was preparing for shifting, the landlord Shri J. C. Raina filed a suit in the Court of Munsiff, Jammu and obtained an ex parte stay order against the Corporation. The respondents preferred an appeal against the same before the District Judge, Jammu who transferred the same to First Additional District Judge where the matter was fixed on 5th and 6th of April, 1995 The appeal was finally fixed for hearing on 25-4-1995 During the course of hearing, the landlord Shri J. C. Raina felt that he has no cause, and therefore, at his instigation the petitioners herein filed the writ petition. The learned Additional District Judge after hearing the arguments passed a detailed reasoned order on 26-4-1995 allowing the appeal and vacating the stay order passed by the Munsiff. On the next day i.e. 27-4-1995, an ex parte stay order was granted by this Court in the present writ petition. The respondents submit that since this is only the machination of Shri Raina that this petition has been filed, after he failed in the Civil Courts to obtain the orders of his liking. Therefore, this writ petition needs to be dismissed. The respondent No. 1 who has filed in affidavit has further submitted that he himself belongs to a reserved category, and as such, he has personal interest in the welfare of the people, for whom the Corporation has been created. It has also been averred that Jammu is not a big city, and no particular place in Jammu city is far off compared to any other place in city. It is not a fact that not only the people of a particular area who have to come to the office of Corporation, but as a matter of fact people belonging to the whole State have dealings with the Corporation.