Gyan Ganga Shiksha Samithi v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board & Anr

1 Pagel of[4] 2016:DHC:8853-DB 3.- A perusal of the sanction-orders dated 17.09.2014 shows that the administrative-approval and the expenditure sanction was granted; for, construction of SC Chaupals at 'M' Block in Raghubir Nagar, J.J. Colony. The prayer in the Writ petition is to ensure construction of the Chaupals in, terms ofthe sanction order dated 17.09.2014^ \

4. In the short affidavit filed on behalf of DUSIB/Respondent No.l, it is ^ stated that as per the guidelines, itis mandatorylo obtain the cdnsent"ofthe local MLA for construction of anyChaupal/Panchayat Ghar.. However, in;. the present case^ the proposals were approved by the coticemed Department: without taking priof consent of the area•MLA and that apart, there was strong resentment and protest against the construction of the Chaupals. between M-283 and M-272 and, therefore, by letter dated 03.11.2014, the area MLA requested-the Respondent No.2 for change of sites to a new' location, i.e. B-571, J.J. Colony, Madipur, New Delhi stating that itis also in the hst of the proposal sent to SC/ST,Department On the basis ofthe said request, the DUSIB was requested to inspect the proposed sites and accordingly, the Superintending Engineer, DUSIB. inspected the proposed sites at Raghubir Nagar on 12.02.2015. However, it was found that the people ofthe neighbourhood opposed the construction ofChaupals.on the, ground that the area,where the construction was proposed was the only open area providing breathing space to the locality people. Therefore, it waS recommended by DUSIB not to construct Chaupals at the nfew sites and it was proposed to change the sites for construction ofChaupals to Madipur area./ - • 5., Though no counter affidavit is filed on behalf of,the Respondent No;2, it is submitted by the learned ASC for GNCTD that the GNCTD is the ' W.P.(C) 6974/2015' ^, - ' •. /, ^ •, -. •:. -. Page 2.of[4]

I. • authority to sanction the proposed works in iraplementation of the various >; schemes for the improvement;of;SC/ST Bastis^ in NCTD -and to make.' • ' available the required fiind^wli^reas the civil works have to be executed by - PUSIB. Thus, it is sought.to be contendedjhat the Respondent No.2 has no role to'play in identifying the site^ for constmctidn of.Ghaupak^^ • Ghars under the scheme. /- ' !.;,

6. It may be true that the Respondent'No.2 is only an authority,to ' sanction the works under the scheme arid provide funds for implementation, thereof However, in the present case, we found that though the sanction.. orders.were issued by the respondent no.2;on n.09-:2014, specifiying the - - sites,atwhich the Ghaupals are to be constructed, there still exits a serioUs: dispute with regard to the sites identified'for construction ofthe Chaupals. -, The correctness of.the objections stated to have been raised by the residerits^ and the,suitajDility ofthe sites that have been, identified cannot be enquired '... into and adjudicated by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under' • Article 226 of the Constitution of India.: At the_same time, we do, not' ", considerJt appropriate to leave the ^aid issue to, be detennined'by DUSIB; which is Only-an:authority to carry out the civil works arid moi^oyerin.> • facts ofthe present case-it appears that it is also^aparty tp the dispute., 7. W^e therefore ^direct that the Respondent Noir shall enquire into the..tp./suitability ofthe site^ identified for constmction of,Chaupals in question and; • - the correctness ofthe ohyections stated fo-have been raisedjby the residents ^\ •: ofthe locaHty as,wdlas tl^ MLAofthexoncerned Gonstime^^ appropriate order deciding the sites at Avhich the Chaupals in question have - ^,to^e constructed. Such an order shall,be passed withinthree in<)nths from,',.^oday after giving;an;opportunity of being heard-to;,• W.-P.fC) 6974/2015 " •' • " ', '. ' •,,, " ~; •,,, _ Pages of[4] 2016:DHC:8853-DB. / •, - V f PUSIB as well as-the residents/Resident Welfare A^ciations of the locality and in consultatipri wifh the MLA of the coricerned constituency. The pUSIB shall take up the construction of Chaupals in terms of the order that may be passed-by the Respondent No.2.and complete the same' expeditiously. ', —, 8.. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner ifapproach the Court, ifnecessity thereof arises.

NOVEMBER 30,2016 gr ' ~ '• W.P.(C) 697472015 ' CHIEF JUSTICE SANGITl IN®irSEHGAL, J Page 4 of[4]