Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 1895 of 2008
PETITIONER:
Chairman/Secretary, Urban Improvement Trust
RESPONDENT:
Madhu Sudan Purohit & Ors
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/03/2008
BENCH:
ASHOK BHAN & DALVEER BHANDARI
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
O R D E R
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1895 OF 2008
[Arising out of S.L.P.(C)No.26064 of 2005]
Leave granted.
By the notification dated 20th/30th April 1984 issued by the Department of Art, Cult
ure
& Archaeology, Govt. of Rajasthan, the city wall around the Old Bikaner City and 20 feet
area on both sides of the city wall was declared as protected area. In the year 2002 a
scheme was formulated by the appellant-Trust under the Rajasthan Improvement Trust
(Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 for construction of shops along the city wall near
Fort School Area. The appellant also obtained no-objection from the Director,
Archaeology & Museums Department, Jaipur. Under the above scheme, the appellant
issued an advertisement for auction of the commercial plots. Pursuant to the said
advertisement, a civil suit bearing No.43/2003 was filed for permanent injunction
restraining the appellant from auctioning the commercial plots under the scheme. The
Civil Judge passed an order restraining the appellant from carrying out the auction of the
commercial plots. An appeal was filed against the said order.
In the meantime, a further notification dated 27th May 2003 was issued by which
notification dated 20th/30th April 1984
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1895/08 .... (Contd.)
- 2 -
was amended and 20 feet of area on both sides of the wall which was also declared as
protected area, did not remain a protected area any longer.
Writ Petition No.6822 of 2003 was filed before the High Court of Rajasthan
challenging notification dated 27th May 2003.
In the meantime, learned District Judge set aside the order of the Civil Judge and
remanded the matter for a fresh decision.
Division Bench of the High Court, by the impugned order, allowed the writ petition
after recording its satisfaction in the following terms :
"Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the different maps
produced before us, we are satisfied that if the Respondent is allowed to allot
the subject land for construction of shops, it will create traffic problem. It is
desirable that the subject area is left open."
It is apparent that the High Court has only recorded its satisfaction and no reasons
have been assigned therefor.
Under these circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remand the case back
to the High Court for a fresh decision in accordance with law.
The appeal is allowed accordingly.