Suo Moto Vs. Dist. Education Offi., Jodhpur and ors - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1118717
CourtRajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided OnJan-15-2014
AppellantSuo Moto
RespondentDist. Education Offi., Jodhpur and ors
Excerpt:
d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 1 in the high court of judicature for rajasthan at jodhpur d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 suo moto versus district education officer, jodhpur & ors.date of order : 15th january 2014 hon’ble mr.justice dinesh maheshwari hon’ble mr.justice banwari lal sharma ms.nupur bhati ].mr.v.k.mathur ]., court commissioners.dr. p.s.bhati, addl. advocate general mr.manoj bhandari for jda, jodhpur mr.c.s.kotwani for municipal corporation, jodhpur mr.b.p.mathur for jai narayan vyas university, jodhpur this matter has been registered as a public interest litigation (‘pil') upon a learned single judge of this court taking suo motu cognizance on the plight of the sports complex at jodhpur, known as gaushala maidan, when it was reported that the complex was suffering from want of proper maintenance and was being allowed to be used for marriage purposes. it was also noticed that for the purpose of parking of the vehicles reaching the marriage functions, a wall between gaushala maidan and the university campus was removed. the learned single judge, inter alia, observed as under: - “.....it is apparent that the act of the responsible persons who took the ground for organizing the marriage ceremony in pulling down the boundary wall of public institution without any permission is an offence under section 3 of the p.d.p.p.act which is a cognizable and non bailable offence and various other offences.”. d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 2 the learned single judge, thereafter, directed the sho, police station, udaimandir, in whose jurisdiction the said sports complex is situated, to forthwith register an f.i.r.and to conduct expeditious investigation. the matter having been registered as pil upon the order so passed by the learned single judge, this court has passed several orders in the past for proper maintenance of gaushala maidan and, looking to the requirements, it was specifically directed in the order dated 09.05.2013 that no part of gaushala maidan shall be let out in any manner for any private ceremonies including marriage functions. in view of the submissions of the learned aag on the basis of communication sent by sho, police station, udaimandir that the vice-chancellor of the university had permitted removal of the wall of the old campus, notices were also ordered to be issued to jai narayan vyas university, jodhpur through its registrar to explain as to why and how the permission was granted for removal, even if temporarily, of the wall of the university premises?. thereafter, looking to the subject matter and the requirements thereto, this court requested the learned counsel mr.v.k.mathur and additionally, the learned counsel ms.nupur bhati to visit the complex concerned and to report about its status. some such reports do indicate that the task of cleaning and restoring gaushala maidan to the befitting status has been taken up and is being attended at. it was also considered appropriate and hence, directed that specific action plan for maintenance and development of gaushala maidan be chalked out and executed; and for that purpose, the collector, jodhpur, who is the chairperson of the samiti d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 3 constituted for management of gaushala maidan, was entrusted with the task of convening the meetings and ensuring execution of the necessary work. lastly, the matter was considered on 06.01.2014 when this court noticed that some short-term jobs were required to be attended at the earliest and the samiti concerned was required to ensure execution of the work at the requisite pace and also to get the work monitored on regular basis. this court also emphasized on the requirement of adequate and proper place for parking and for that purpose, the samiti concerned was directed to convene the meeting at the earliest with prior information to the court commissioners.on 06.01.2014, this court also re-indicated the requirement of the specific submissions as regards investigation in f.i.r.no.171/2013, said to have been lodged in relation to the damage to the public property in this matter, for which, the things remained rather obscure. this court requested the learned aag to complete his instructions and to place the case diary relating to the said f.i.r.for perusal on the next date. it was also expected that the investigating officer shall remain present before the court. however, on 06.01.2014, nobody chose to appear on behalf of jai narayan vyas university, jodhpur and hence, this court directed that the notices be issued to the concerned officers of the university, to remain present on the next date. today, on the matter being taken up, what was given out before us had been nothing less than surprising and shocking that so far f.i.r.no.171/2013, police station udaimandir was concerned, allegedly a negative final report (fr) had been filed by the d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 4 investigating officer on 03.01.2014 before the court concerned. it was also given out that the court concerned had accepted the said final report. in the given circumstances, we felt rather dismayed that when the f.i.r.was registered upon the observations made by this court; and this court is seized of the matter, as to how a negative final report was at all filed without even informing this court?. the learned aag prayed for some time to complete his instructions but primarily pointed out that such a final report had been drawn essentially with reference to the communication dated 27.04.2013 of the complainant himself, who suggested that the f.i.r.had been lodged in ignorance of the true facts; and that a permission was indeed granted for removal of the wall. this court, being not satisfied with the submissions made, directed the dy. registrar (judl.) to requisition the case file relating to the final report from the court concerned. the file of the said final report (no.462/2013).as said to have been filed on 03.01.2014, has been requisitioned from the court of metropolitan magistrate no.3, jodhpur metro and has now been placed before us wherefrom it appears that on 03.01.2014, the engineer of the university, who had lodged the f.i.r., appeared before the concerned magistrate and submitted that he was not interested in any further proceedings in the matter. however, the learned magistrate posted the matter for examining the file and for passing the appropriate orders on 27.01.2014. the additional affidavit as filed today by the said university engineer, suggesting that final report had been accepted by the concerned court, is obviously incorrect on material particulars.d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 5 in a comprehension of all the facts and the surrounding factors.we are constrained to draw an inference that the university officers.including the university engineer, who had filed the additional affidavit in an irresponsible manner and who had eagerly suggested before the magistrate court that he was not interested in any proceedings, are indeed desirous of hushing up the real issues in the matter. the concerned officers.who are supposed to be the trustees and protectors of the property, remain directly answerable in relation to the damage to the public property; and cannot be permitted to avoid their responsibility. in any case, the attempt on the part of the university officers.as also the investigating officer to hush up the things by filing a negative final report without informing this court, though the matter is pending in this pil, remains seriously questionable. having regard to the circumstances, it is considered appropriate and hence directed that the file of fr no.462/2013 of the court of metropolitan magistrate no.3, jodhpur metro, which has been requisitioned by the dy. registrar (judl.).shall remain attached to this writ petition and further proceedings therein by the magistrate concerned shall remain stayed until further orders of this court. though we are dissatisfied that the concerned officers had filed the negative fr without even informing this court and the attempt, prima facie, appears to be that of trying to over reach the process of law but, before passing any other order in this matter in this regard, we consider it appropriate and hence, extend an opportunity to the concerned officers.including the investigating officer, the sho concerned and the acp (east).who had proceeded d.b.civil writ petition (pil) no.4321/2013 6 to prepare, approve and file the said fr, as also to the concerned officers of the university, to explain their conduct. all the concerned may file their affidavits or additional affidavits on or before 31.01.2014, if so desired. pursuant to the orders earlier passed in this matter, it is informed by the court commissioners that several tasks have been executed and others are under execution. the learned commissioner ms.nupur bhati has indicated that as per the information gathered by her, probably, garbage collection is not being attended at on regular basis. the learned counsel mr.c.s.kotwani appearing for the municipal corporation, jodhpur assures that necessary instructions shall be issued for proper execution of the requisite work. having regard to the circumstances, we defer further consideration of this matter beyond two weeks. put up on 05.02.2014. (banwari lal sharma),j. (dinesh maheshwari),j. cpgoyal/-
Judgment:

D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 Suo Moto versus District Education Officer, Jodhpur & ORS.DATE OF ORDER

: 15th January 2014 HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA Ms.Nupur Bhati ].Mr.V.K.Mathur ]., Court CommissioneRs.Dr.

P.S.Bhati, Addl.

Advocate General Mr.Manoj Bhandari for JDA, Jodhpur Mr.C.S.Kotwani for Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur Mr.B.P.Mathur for Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur <><><> This matter has been registered as a Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL') upon a learned Single Judge of this Court taking suo motu cognizance on the plight of the Sports Complex at Jodhpur, known as Gaushala Maidan, when it was reported that the complex was suffering from want of proper maintenance and was being allowed to be used for marriage purposes.

It was also noticed that for the purpose of parking of the vehicles reaching the marriage functions, a wall between Gaushala Maidan and the University Campus was removed.

The learned Single Judge, inter alia, observed as under: - “.....It is apparent that the act of the responsible persons who took the ground for organizing the marriage ceremony in pulling down the boundary wall of public institution without any permission is an offence under Section 3 of the P.D.P.P.Act which is a cognizable and non bailable offence and various other offences.”

.

D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 2 The learned Single Judge, thereafter, directed the SHO, Police Station, Udaimandir, in whose jurisdiction the said Sports Complex is situated, to forthwith register an F.I.R.and to conduct expeditious investigation.

The matter having been registered as PIL upon the order so passed by the learned Single Judge, this Court has passed several orders in the past for proper maintenance of Gaushala Maidan and, looking to the requirements, it was specifically directed in the order dated 09.05.2013 that no part of Gaushala Maidan shall be let out in any manner for any private ceremonies including marriage functions.

In view of the submissions of the learned AAG on the basis of communication sent by SHO, Police Station, Udaimandir that the Vice-Chancellor of the University had permitted removal of the wall of the old campus, notices were also ordered to be issued to Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur through its Registrar to explain as to why and how the permission was granted for removal, even if temporarily, of the wall of the University premises?.

Thereafter, looking to the subject matter and the requirements thereto, this Court requested the learned counsel Mr.V.K.Mathur and additionally, the learned counsel Ms.Nupur Bhati to visit the complex concerned and to report about its status.

Some such reports do indicate that the task of cleaning and restoring Gaushala Maidan to the befitting status has been taken up and is being attended at.

It was also considered appropriate and hence, directed that specific action plan for maintenance and development of Gaushala Maidan be chalked out and executed; and for that purpose, the Collector, Jodhpur, who is the Chairperson of the Samiti D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 3 constituted for management of Gaushala Maidan, was entrusted with the task of convening the meetings and ensuring execution of the necessary work.

Lastly, the matter was considered on 06.01.2014 when this Court noticed that some short-term jobs were required to be attended at the earliest and the Samiti concerned was required to ensure execution of the work at the requisite pace and also to get the work monitored on regular basis.

This Court also emphasized on the requirement of adequate and proper place for parking and for that purpose, the Samiti concerned was directed to convene the meeting at the earliest with prior information to the Court CommissioneRs.On 06.01.2014, this Court also re-indicated the requirement of the specific submissions as regards investigation in F.I.R.No.171/2013, said to have been lodged in relation to the damage to the public property in this matter, for which, the things remained rather obscure.

This Court requested the learned AAG to complete his instructions and to place the case diary relating to the said F.I.R.for perusal on the next date.

It was also expected that the Investigating Officer shall remain present before the Court.

However, on 06.01.2014, nobody chose to appear on behalf of Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur and hence, this Court directed that the notices be issued to the concerned officers of the University, to remain present on the next date.

Today, on the matter being taken up, what was given out before us had been nothing less than surprising and shocking that so far F.I.R.No.171/2013, Police Station Udaimandir was concerned, allegedly a negative Final Report (FR) had been filed by the D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 4 Investigating Officer on 03.01.2014 before the Court concerned.

It was also given out that the Court concerned had accepted the said Final Report.

In the given circumstances, we felt rather dismayed that when the F.I.R.was registered upon the observations made by this Court; and this Court is seized of the matter, as to how a negative Final Report was at all filed without even informing this Court?.

The learned AAG prayed for some time to complete his instructions but primarily pointed out that such a Final Report had been drawn essentially with reference to the communication dated 27.04.2013 of the complainant himself, who suggested that the F.I.R.had been lodged in ignorance of the true facts; and that a permission was indeed granted for removal of the wall.

This Court, being not satisfied with the submissions made, directed the Dy.

Registrar (Judl.) to requisition the case file relating to the Final Report from the Court concerned.

The file of the said Final Report (No.462/2013).as said to have been filed on 03.01.2014, has been requisitioned from the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur Metro and has now been placed before us wherefrom it appears that on 03.01.2014, the Engineer of the University, who had lodged the F.I.R., appeared before the concerned Magistrate and submitted that he was not interested in any further proceedings in the matter.

However, the learned Magistrate posted the matter for examining the file and for passing the appropriate orders on 27.01.2014.

The additional affidavit as filed today by the said University Engineer, suggesting that Final Report had been accepted by the concerned Court, is obviously incorrect on material particulaRs.D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 5 In a comprehension of all the facts and the surrounding factORS.we are constrained to draw an inference that the University OfficeRs.including the University Engineer, who had filed the additional affidavit in an irresponsible manner and who had eagerly suggested before the Magistrate Court that he was not interested in any proceedings, are indeed desirous of hushing up the real issues in the matter.

The concerned officeRs.who are supposed to be the trustees and protectors of the property, remain directly answerable in relation to the damage to the public property; and cannot be permitted to avoid their responsibility.

In any case, the attempt on the part of the University OfficeRs.as also the Investigating Officer to hush up the things by filing a negative Final Report without informing this Court, though the matter is pending in this PIL, remains seriously questionable.

Having regard to the circumstances, it is considered appropriate and hence directed that the file of FR No.462/2013 of the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur Metro, which has been requisitioned by the Dy.

Registrar (Judl.).shall remain attached to this writ petition and further proceedings therein by the Magistrate concerned shall remain stayed until further orders of this Court.

Though we are dissatisfied that the concerned officers had filed the negative FR without even informing this Court and the attempt, prima facie, appears to be that of trying to over reach the process of law but, before passing any other order in this matter in this regard, we consider it appropriate and hence, extend an opportunity to the concerned officeRs.including the Investigating Officer, the SHO concerned and the ACP (East).who had proceeded D.B.Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4321/2013 6 to prepare, approve and file the said FR, as also to the concerned officers of the University, to explain their conduct.

All the concerned may file their affidavits or additional affidavits on or before 31.01.2014, if so desired.

Pursuant to the orders earlier passed in this matter, it is informed by the Court Commissioners that several tasks have been executed and others are under execution.

The learned Commissioner Ms.Nupur Bhati has indicated that as per the information gathered by her, probably, garbage collection is not being attended at on regular basis.

The learned counsel Mr.C.S.Kotwani appearing for the Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur assures that necessary instructions shall be issued for proper execution of the requisite work.

Having regard to the circumstances, we defer further consideration of this matter beyond two weeks.

Put up on 05.02.2014.

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J.

(DINESH MAHESHWARI),J.

Cpgoyal/-