Authorities must consider bus-stand cloakroom applications in light of their necessity as passenger amenities.

The petitioner sought allotment of 2,500 sq. ft. of land near the Hi-Tech Bus Stand, Bilaspur, to establish a luggage-parcel house or cloakroom.

His application was rejected on 27 April 2022 because the Chhattisgarh Audhyogik Bhumi and Bhawan Prabhandhan Niyam, 2015 contained no enabling provision for such an allotment.

The petitioner challenged that rejection, asserting that a cloakroom was a necessary passenger amenity.

The State submitted that he should approach the Municipal Corporation and CSIDC; those authorities stated that they would consider a fresh application in accordance with law.

1. Whether the rejection of the petitioner’s application for land to establish a luggage-parcel house at the Hi-Tech Bus Stand should be set aside.

2. Whether the concerned authorities should consider a fresh application for the proposed facility, having regard to the need for passenger amenities at the bus stand.

The Court noted that the application had been rejected because the Chhattisgarh Audhyogik Bhumi and Bhawan Prabhandhan Niyam, 2015 contained no provision authorising allotment for the proposed purpose.

It relied on Dwarikaprasad Tiwari v. State of M.P. and Others, 2008 (1) MPHT 102, concerning the provision and reassessment of public amenities at bus stands.

It relied on B. Balathamburaj v. The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai, 2011 SCC OnLine Mad 2362, concerning the preservation of spaces earmarked for public purposes.

The Court stated that a bus stand is a public facility at which reasonable amenities for passengers should be available.

The Court treated the cloakroom as a necessary amenity at the Hi-Tech Bus Stand, drawing on the principle that bus stands should provide facilities for passengers’ convenience.

It did not direct allotment of the land or invalidate the rejection on the merits.

Instead, in light of the authorities’ position that a fresh application could be considered, it permitted the petitioner to apply to the Municipal Corporation and CSIDC and directed them to decide the application in accordance with law, while keeping the need for a cloakroom in mind.

The authorities were directed to consider and decide it on its merits and in accordance with law within 60 days, keeping in mind the necessity of a cloakroom at the bus stand.

No direct allotment of land was ordered.