Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Suit was filed by the plaintiff/petitioners seeking a decree of injunction to restrain the defendant/respondents from raising any construction over the land in dispute or to change its nature and user on the allegation that it was recorded as 'Sarvjanik Khalihan' and the defendant/respondents are illegally raising a Baratshala (Marriage House) over the same. An application for temporary injunction was also moved.
Both the courts below have rejected the application for temporary injunction on the findings that Gaon Sabha had passed a resolution for changing the user of the disputed land and for construction of Baratshala for the reason that the same was not being used for the purpose for which it was reserved and the State Govt. has also sanctioned a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- for construction, which has already started and the foundation is complete. The purpose of 'Sarvjanik Khalihan' was also public purpose and construction of Baratshala (Marriage House) is also for a public purpose. Since Gaon Sabha found that the land was not being used as 'Sarvjanik Khalihan' by the residents of the village, as such, the user was changed and the Baratshala was proposed to be constructed thereon, which was duly approved by the State Govt. inasmuch as admittedly the funds were sanctioned for the said construction by the Govt. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Prasad Verma and others Vs. Collector Maharajganj and others (2007 [103] RD 90) has held that the State Govt. has power to change the user of a land earmarked for a public purpose to another public purpose.
Since in the present case, there is approval by the State Govt. for change of the user of the land reserved for one public purpose to another public purpose and the construction on the land in dispute has already commenced and is complete upto the foundation stage, the courts below have committed no illegality in dismissing the application for temporary injunction. The impugned orders, thus, do not call for any interference by this Court. The Writ Petition accordingly fails and stands dismissed in limine.
Order Date :- 17.6.2010 yachna