'No Legal Right Affected': Patna High Court Dismisses Plea Against Change In Site For Construction Of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan
The Patna High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the decision to change the site for the construction of a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in Darbhanga district, holding that the petitioners had failed to show any personal legal injury or violation of a legal right.The petition was filed to quash the resolution passed by the Aam Sabha on 02.08.2016 and the subsequent order dated...
The Patna High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the decision to change the site for the construction of a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in Darbhanga district, holding that the petitioners had failed to show any personal legal injury or violation of a legal right.
The petition was filed to quash the resolution passed by the Aam Sabha on 02.08.2016 and the subsequent order dated 06.12.2016 passed by the District Magistrate, Darbhanga, approving the relocation of the proposed Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan. The petitioners also sought a direction for the construction to be carried out at the original site in Mauza-Pakahi, contending that it had already been approved, tenders had been floated, and the plot was more suitable in terms of size and location.
Dismissing the petition, Justice Mohit Kumar Shah held that the petitioners had not shown how they were personally affected or what legal right of theirs had been violated by the change in site, and therefore could not maintain the petition.
Justice Shah said, “...petitioners have nowhere in the writ petition made any statement as to how they have been personally effected by the impugned order dated 6.12.2016 or as to what personal/legal injury has been caused to them and moreover, there is complete absence of any pleading in the writ petition with regard to existence of any legal right, which has been violated, this Court finds that the present writ petition is not maintainable at the behest of the writ petitioners, hence, is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone”.
The Court stated that the reliefs sought under Article 226 are available only when a petitioner establishes the existence of a legal right and its infringement, which was not the case here.
On examining the record, the Court also found no illegality in the decision to shift the site. It noted that the originally selected plot in Mauza-Pakahi was classified as Bandh land, prone to waterlogging, and was occupied by over 20 Dalit families who had been residing there for decades. On the other hand, the newly selected site in Mauza-Jhajhara was adjacent to the main road, better suited for construction, and had been selected unanimously by the Aam Sabha. The land belonged to a government middle school, whose management committee had issued a no-objection.
The Court noted that the site change was recommended by the Circle Officer and Sub-Divisional Officer after proper enquiry and was formally approved by the District Magistrate.
The Court said, “this Court finds that there is no ambiguity much less illegality in the decision / order of the District Magistrate, Darbhganga dated 06.12.2016, especially in view of the submission of the learned counsel for the Respondents-State to the effect that the land situated at villageJhajhara … is a more suitable land, is free from any encumbrance, is not having any water logging problem, is adjacent to the main road … and moreover, post-office, health center, high school, raised platform and market are situated nearby, apart from the fact that there is a serious dispute as to whether village / Mauza-Pakahi is the village headquarter of Gram Panchayat Raj Pakahi-Jhajhara, hence, there is no violation of the guidelines, issued by the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.”
Further, the Court recorded that approximately 80% of the construction at the new site had already been completed and that halting the project would result in unnecessary loss to the public exchequer.
“This Court finds that huge sums of money has already been invested and the construction work of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in question is at an advanced stage, hence stalling the same at this juncture would not only cause further delay… but will also result in huge cost escalation of the project apart from wastage of huge sums of public money…” the Court said.
Finding the writ petition devoid of merit and lacking maintainability, the Court dismissed it in entirety.
Case Title: Brij Nandan @ Siya Ram Yadav and Anr vs The State of Bihar and ors
LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 30