State Government’s Shift of Sports Complex to Rural Area Quashed. Court Orders CIDCO to Revert Land for Sports Complex Development, Emphasizing Public Interest and Transparency
Summary of Judgement
The State Government's decision to relocate the Government Sports Complex from Navi Mumbai to a rural area for commercial exploitation has been criticized as arbitrary and against public interest. The land, reserved for 21 years for a sports complex, is now being repurposed, benefiting builders and developers at the expense of public interest. The court found this decision lacking in rational justification and detrimental to the urban population's needs. Consequently, the court quashed the decision, directing CIDCO to allocate the land for its original purpose, developing the sports complex in Navi Mumbai. The court emphasized the significance of sports infrastructure for public welfare and mandated transparency and fairness in land utilization.
Introduction
- Observation on the State Government's decision against public interest.
- Criticism of the shift from a government sports complex to commercial exploitation.
Impact of the Decision
- Consequences of making land available for commercial purposes.
- Implications for public interest and builders/developers' benefits.
Criticism of Government and CIDCO
- Government's non-application of mind and lack of prioritizing sports.
- Nebulous approach of State Government and CIDCO towards sports importance.
Importance of Sports
- Role of sports in physical and mental development.
- International and national perspectives on the significance of sports facilities.
Judicial Opinions on Sports
- High Court of Jammu and Kashmir's observations on sports facilities.
- Supreme Court's stance on accessibility and importance of sports infrastructure.
Legal Precedents
- References to Supreme Court decisions highlighting the importance of sports.
- Emphasis on the responsibility of the State to provide sports facilities.
Conclusion and Court Order
- Court's conclusion that the State Government's decision is arbitrary and unconstitutional.
- Order directing CIDCO to hand over the land for the sports complex and nullifying the allotment to respondent no. 5.
- Permission for the State Government to develop an additional sports complex if desired.
Stay of Order
- Request for stay of the order by CIDCO and State Government.
- Court grants a stay on paragraph 116(ii) for four weeks.
Case Title: Indian Institute of Architects Navi Mumbai Center Versus The City & Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. Ors.
Citation: 2024 LawText (BOM) (7) 5
Case Number: PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 28 OF 2019
Advocate(s): Mr. Indrajeet Kulkarni for Petitioner/Applicant. Mr. Nitin V. Gangal with Mr. Ashok D. Kadam with Ms. Prerna Shukla for Respondent No.1/CIDCO. Mr. Y. S. Jahagirdar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Girish S. Godbole, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal and Mr.Shamim Shaikh, for Respondent No.5. Mr. B. V. Samant, Addl. Govt. Pleader with Mr. A. A. Alaspukar, AGP for State/Respondent Nos.2, 4, 6 and 7. Mr. Tejesh Dande with Mr. Bharat Gadhavi for Respondent No.3/ NMMC. Ms. Nilima Sanglikar, for Respondent No.8.
Date of Decision: 2024-07-01
