Karnataka High Court
Sri.V.R. Beedu vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 July, 2019
Bench: Chief Justice, H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2019
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION Nos.44760-44762 OF 2017 (GM-RES-PIL)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI.V.R. BEEDU
S/O LATE B.R. BEEDU
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETIC COACH
R/AT NO 1584
'B' BLOCK, SAHAKARNAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 092
2. SMT ASHWINI NACHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETICS COACH
AND OLYMPIEN
ARJUN AWARDEE
R/AT NO 516, 6TH 'E' CROSS, 17TH 'A' MAIN
6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE - 560034.
3. SRI RAMESH N R
S/O RAMAREDDY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETIC COACH
R/AT NO 17
GROUND FLOOR, 3RD CROSS
5TH MAIN, S.R. NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560027
-2-
4. SRI S.D. ESHAN
S/O LATE DUGGAPPA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
INTERNATIONAL MEDALIST & ARJUN AWARDEE
R/AT NO 213, 2ND CROSS
VIGNESH HEIGHT APARTMENT
CANARA BANK COLONY
NAGARABHAVI,
BANGALORE - 560072
5. SRI HARISH SHETTY
S/O K.R. SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
NATIONAL MEDALIST
R/A EAST END MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560041
6. SRI UDAY K PRABHU
S/O KRISHNA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
ATHLETIC COACH, OLYMPIAN
& DHAYAN CHAND AWARDEE
NO 45, 4TH MAIN,
NEAR BALAJI KALYANA MANTAPPA,
BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE - 560085
7. SRI G.V.GAONKAR
NATIONAL COACH (FORMER)
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETIC COACH
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
NO H - 12, SHRIRAM SADHANA APARTMENT
GOKULA, MATTIKERE
BANGALORE - 560054
8. SRI AYYAPPA B P
S/O PANDURANGA B A
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETE AND ATHLETIC COACH
R/AT NO 206,
MITHUNA WHILE WATER APARTMENT
-3-
SRIRAMPURAM MAIN ROAD, JAKKUR POST
BANGALORE - 560064
9. SMT PRAMEELA G.G
D/O G.A.GANAPATHI
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETE OLYMPIAN ATHLETE &
ARJUN AWARDEE
R/AT NO 206, MITHUNA WHILE WATER APARTMENT
SRIRAMPURA MAIN ROAD
JAKKUR POST
BANGALORE - 560064
10. SRI KRISHNAMURTHY
S/O SHANMUGAM
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
ATHLETIC COACH
R/A NO 2, PUJAPPA GARDEN
BASAPPA ROAD,
SHANTHINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560027
11. SMT KANTHAMMA
D/O KRISHNA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
ATHLETIC COACH
R/A NO 8/3, 2ND MAIN,
1ST CROSS, BHOVI PALYA,
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
BANGALORE - 560086
12. SRI BALAKRISHNA
S/O GOVINDA AVALAKKI
ATHLETIC COACH
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
5TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
SAMPANGIRAMANAGARA
BANGALORE - 560027
13. SMT BINDU
-4-
W/O SURESH
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETE AND ATHLETIC COACH
R/A NO 40, MANDHARA
GROUND FLOOR, JHBCS LAYOUT
GUBBALA SUBRAMANYAPURA POST
BANGALORE - 560061
14. SRI ROHITH
S/O ASHOK HOVAL
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
ATHLETIC COACH
& NATIOANL MEDALIST
R/A NO 33, 10TH CROSS,
BAIRASANDRA 1ST BLOCK,
BANGALORE - 560011
15. REETH ABRAHAM
D/O DEVAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
OLYMPIAN & ARJUN AWARDEE
R/A NO 609, 6TH BLOCK
80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA
BANGALORE - 560095
16. DR SHANKAR
S/O U.VELU
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
OLYMPIAN & NATIONAL ATHLETIC COACH
R/A NO F-4, SAI MADURA GRACE APARTMENTS
CHANNAMAKERE ACHHUKATTU,
BSK 3RD STAGE
BANGALORE - 560085
17. KAREAPPA S.H
S/O. SIDDARAM,
ATHLETIC COACH
R/AT NO. 16, 2ND FLOOR
PUTTENAHALLI PALYA
JP NAGAR 7TH PHASE
BANGALORE 560078
-5-
18. SURESH C
S/O. LATE. G CHANDRASHEKARAIAH
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
ATHLETIC COACH
R/AT NO. 25/11, 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS
VITTALANAGAR, CHAMARAJAPET,
BANGALORE 560018
19. SRI B. CHETHAN
S/O BALASUBRAMANYA,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.3/1, 4TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS
S.R. NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027
20. SRI HARSHITH S
S/O SHASHIDHAR.N
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
INTERNATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.103, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS
MUTHURANJAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 054
21. SMT HARSHINI KUMARI D
W/O NISHITH KUMAR,
NATIONAL ATHELETE
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
SRI RAI MARIYAPPANAPALYA,
JNANABHARATHI
BANGALORE-560 056
22. SRI DIVISHA.B
S/O VASANTHA KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
VIJAYA BANK
R/AT NO.14, LAKSHMI BUILDING
J.C. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002
-6-
23. SRI. SACHIN
S/O VITTAL POOJAR
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
VIJAYA BANK, SERVICE BRANCH
M.G.ROAD, MAYOHALL
BANGALORE-560001
24. DR. VISHWANATH B.L (PARENTS)
S/O N. CHIKKANANJAPPA
R/AT NO.95, 12TH MAIN, BINNY LAYOUT
II STAGE, VIJAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560040
25. SOUJANYA K.G
D/O K.P. GOPAL
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.21, 3RD CROSS
'A' SECTOR, AMRUTHNAGAR
SAHAKARNAGAR
BANGALORE-560 092
26. SMT. JAMUNA.K
D/O KARTHIK KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
NO.506, 1ST 'A' CROSS, III STAGE
4TH BLOCK, BASAVESHWARANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 079
27. SRI. V. VARUN KUMAR
S/O VADIVELU.W
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE,
R/A NO.20, VGP M.S. PALYA,
M.S. NAGAR,
BANGALORE 560 056.
28. SRI. LAKSHMAN.S
-7-
S/O SUBRAMANYA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/A NO.318/1, KANAKANAGAR
NEAR AQSA MASJID,
V.V. EXTENTION, HOSKOTE TQ.
BANGALORE DISTRICT 560 053.
29. SRI. GOVIND SOLANKI
S/O DODRAM
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/A. NO.7, III FLOOR, 2ND CROSS
K.V. TEMPLE STREET
SOURASHTRAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
30. SRI. K.L. GIREESHA
S/O LAKSHMANA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
NATIONAL MEADLIST
NO.103, KALPATARU 3RD MAIN
3RD CROSS, M.S.R. LAYOUT,
BANGLAORE 560 056.
31. SRI ANMOL RAO
S/O DAYANANDA RAO
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
STATE ATHLETE
NO.207, MAITHRI APARTMENTS
MARENAHALLI TANK BUND AREA
JAYANAGAR, 9TH BLOCK
BANGALORE-560069
32. SRI AKASH ASTKAR.M
S/O SRI MANJUNATH
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
NO.320, NEW MANJU MEN'S WEAR
CHOKKASANDRA MAIN ROAD
DASARAHALLI
BANGALORE-560 057
-8-
33. SRI MADAN KUMAR
S/O RAM SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/A NO.9/1, 5TH MAIN ROAD
18TH CROSS, K.P.AGRAHARA
BANGALORE-560 023
34. SRI MOHAMMED SUFIYAN
S/O ABDUL MAJEED SULTAN
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
S.M. MILKMAN STREET
LANGFORD ROAD
NEAR HOCKEY STADIUM
BANGALORE-560 025
35. S.TABRESS KHAN
S/O NASEER KHAN
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
17TH CROSS, 10TH MAIN ROAD
PADARAYANAPURA
BANGALORE-560 026
36. SRI R.PRAVEEN KUMAR
S/O N.RAGUPATHY
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
NATIONAL PARA ATHLETE
NO.12/3,12TH CROSS
4TH MAIN ROAD
BEHIND SINDHI HOSPITAL
S.R. NAGAR
BANGALORE
37. SMT SHALINI SARASWATHI
D/O R GOPINATH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
NATIONAL PARA ATHLETE
R/AT NO.833,23RD CROSS
-9-
II MAIN, H.S.R.LAYOUT
SECTOR -2
BANGALORE-560 102
38. SRI VADEERAJ BHAT
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/A NO.252,LAKESHORE HOMES
KASAVANAHALLI
OFF SARJAPURA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 035
39. SRI DRUPAD REDDY G.R.
S/O RAMI REDDY.G
INTERATIONAL ATHLETE
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/A 100/4,G MAIN STREET
ULSOOR JOGUPALYA
BANGALORE-560 008
40. SMT AMISHA WADEKAR
D/O D G WADEKAR
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
INTERATIONAL ATHLETE
& ATHLETIC COACH
NO.48,7TH CROSS,4TH MAIN
S.R.NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 027
41. SRI KIRAN T.E.
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.57,D1,15TH CROSS
MALLESWARAM
BANGALORE-560 003
42. SRI AYYAPPA
S/O MUDDAPPA K.E.
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
NO.17,1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS
- 10 -
CHAMUNDESHWARI LAYOUT
BANGALORE-560 097
43. SRI PRASHANT.R
S/O RAJKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.14,1ST MAIN ROAD
MARKANDESHWARA NAGAR
NEAR BINNY PET
BANGALORE-560 23
44. SMT.SOUMYA SAVANTH
D/O U.R.SAWANTH
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
NATIONAL MEDALIST
R/AT NO.17, 2ND STAGE, 1ST CROSS
B.E.M.L. LAYOUT,
KAMALANAGAR
BASAVESHWARANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 079
45. SRI.PRASHANTH CHOWDAPPA
S/O CHIKKA CHOWDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.833, 23RD CROSS
22ND MAIN, H.S.R. LAYOUT
SECTOR-2,
BANGALORE-560 102
46. SMT.ARPITHA.M
D/O MANJUNATH
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
INTERNATIONAL MEDALIST
NO.17, 2ND STAGE, 1ST CROSS
B.E.M.L. LAYOUT,
KAMALANAGAR,
BASAVESHWARANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 079.
- 11 -
47. SRI.SHIVANANDA
S/O GOVINDARAJ
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.47,
ST.MICHAEL CHURCH ROAD
NEAR NIRMALA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL
SHANTHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 027
48. SMT.SNEHA.P.J.
D/O JAISHEELAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.21, NEW COLONY
R.P.C.LAYOUT,
VIJAYANAGAR, II STAGE
BANGALORE-560 104
49. BHARATH K.A.
S/O K.ANJI RAJU
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
NATIONAL ATHLETE
R/AT NO.5, 26TH MAIN
17TH CROSS,
J.P.NAGAR 6TH PHASE
BANGALORE-560 078
50. PRAJNA S. PRAKASH
D/O SOORYA PRAKASH.N
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
NATIONAL MEDALIST
R/AT NO.808/7, 61TH CROSS
5TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 010
... PETITIONERS
(BY SMT SUSHEELA, SR.COUNSEL A/W
SHRI PRADEEP H.S, ADV.)
- 12 -
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH
SERVICE AND SPORTS
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE 560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
2. THE COMMISSIONER
DIRECTOR, YOUTH EMPOWERMENT AND SPORTS
DIRECTOR GENERAL,
SPORTS AUTHORITY OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE
3. MANAGING DIRECTOR
J.S.W BANGALORE FOOTBALL CLUB PVT LTD
REGISTERED OFFICER AT J.S.W CENTRE
BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX
BANDRA EAST,
MUMBAI 400 51
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI D.NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1 & 2,
SHRI ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SR.COUNSEL
A/W SHRI SUBRAMANYA.R, ADV. FOR R3)
---
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 F THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,
PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO REMOVE ANY
CONSTRUCTION, FILL UP, DIGGING BARRICADE AND
OTHER BLOCK ETC., MADE SO FAR AND RESTORE THE
CENTRAL AREA OF SYNTHETIC TRACK AND FIELD OF
SREE KANTEERAVA STADIUM AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- 13 -
ORDER
Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned senior counsel for the third respondent and learned Additional Government Advocate for the first and second respondents.
2. The issue raised in this PIL concerns Sri.Kanteerava Stadium, which admittedly is the property of the first respondent, State of Karnataka. The first to seventeenth petitioners are all former National and International Athletes and are working as athletics coach and Eighteenth to fiftieth petitioners are National and International level athletes.
3. These writ petitions in the nature of PIL are filed to invite the attention of the Court to the agreement dated 22nd May 2014 executed by the Director, Department of Youth Empowerment and Sports in favour of the third respondent, which is a private limited company. Under the said agreement, a licence was granted to the
- 14 -
third respondent, which is a private club to use the said stadium.
4. The objection in brief raised to the said agreement is that apart from the fact that the Director had no power to execute such an agreement authorizing the third respondent to use the stadium, such an important public stadium could not have been entrusted to the third respondent by executing a licence agreement without following a fair and transparent process. It is pointed out in the agreement that the term was only till the conclusion of the FIFA under 17 World Cup to be organized in India in the year 2017. The contention is that even after the term expired, the third respondent continued to possess the stadium.
5. Our attention is invited to the letter dated 11th August 2017 issued by the Secretary of the Stadium Management Committee and Director, Department of Youth Empowerment and Sports to the Chief Executive
- 15 -
Officer of the third respondent by which a permission was granted to the third respondent to utilize the stadium as a home venue for all National and AFC competition football matches from 11th August 2017 to 31st May 2018.
6. In the objections filed by the State Government, it is contended that the stadium is maintained by the Management Committee consisting of the Hon'ble Minister of Youth Empowerment and Sports and five other officers. It is contended that the licence agreement dated 22nd May 2014 has expired.
7. The third respondent has filed the objections and additional objections setting out the efforts made by the third respondent for developing the stadium and the amount spent by the said respondent on the said work. The photographs have also been annexed. It is contended that the athletics and other activities on the stadium were not obstructed by the third respondent. The various
- 16 -
allegations made by the petitioners have been denied in the additional objections filed by the third respondent.
8. It is not in dispute that the stadium is a public property. The stadium has various facilities to enable the members of the public to play various games. There are facilities for athletics also. As far as the law relating public property is concerned, the same is very well settled.
9. We may make useful reference to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Akhil Bhartiya Upbhokta Congress -v- State of Madhya Pradesh and others1 wherein the Apex Court has held that the Government has to act as a trustee of a public property and that the public property can be parted with or transferred only by following a fair and transparent process. It is held that the fair and transparent process can be achieved by having a rational policy of allotment. Paragraphs 65 to 68 of the said decision read thus:
1
[2011) 5 SCC 29]
- 17 -
65. What needs to be emphasized is that the State and/or its agencies/instrumentalities cannot give largesse to any person according to the sweet will and whims of the political entities and/or officers of the State. Every action/decision of the State and/or its agencies/instrumentalities to give largesse or confer benefit must be founded on a sound, transparent, discernible and well defined policy, which shall be made known to the public by publication in the Official Gazette and other recognized modes of publicity and such policy must be implemented/executed by adopting a non-
discriminatory and non-arbitrary method irrespective of the class or category of persons proposed to be benefited by the policy. The distribution of largesse like allotment of land, grant of quota, permit license etc. by the State and its agencies/instrumentalities should always be done in a fair and equitable manner and the element of favoritism or nepotism shall not influence the exercise of discretion, if any, conferred upon the particular functionary or officer of the State.
66. We may add that there cannot be any policy, much less, a rational policy of allotting land on the basis of applications made by individuals, bodies, organizations or institutions de hors an invitation or advertisement by the State or its agency
- 18 -
/instrumentality. By entertaining applications made by individuals, organisations or institutions for allotment of land or for grant of any other type of largesse the State cannot exclude other eligible persons from lodging competing claim. Any allotment of land or grant of other form of largesse by the State or its agencies/instrumentalities by treating the exercise as a private venture is liable to be treated as arbitrary, discriminatory and an act of favoritism and/or nepotism violating the soul of the equality clause embodied in Article 14 of the Constitution.
67. This, however, does not mean that the State can never allot land to the institutions/organisations engaged in educational, cultural, social or philanthropic activities or are rendering service to the Society except by way of auction. Nevertheless, it is necessary to observe that once a piece of land is earmarked or identified for allotment to institutions/organisations engaged in any such activity, the actual exercise of allotment must be done in a manner consistent with the doctrine of equality. The competent authority should, as a matter of course, issue an advertisement incorporating therein the conditions of eligibility so as to enable all similarly situated eligible persons, institutions/organisations to participate in the
- 19 -
process of allotment, whether by way of auction or otherwise. In a given case the Government may allot land at a fixed price but in that case also allotment must be preceded by a wholesome exercise consistent with Article 14 of the Constitution.
68. The allotment of land by the State or its agencies/instrumentalities to a body/organization /institution which carry the tag of caste, community or religion is not only contrary to the idea of Secular Democratic Republic but is also fraught with grave danger of dividing the society on caste or communal lines. The allotment of land to such bodies/organisations/institutions on political considerations or by way of favoritism and/or nepotism or with a view to nurture the vote bank for future is constitutionally impermissible."
(underlines supplied)
10. In the present case, apart from the contention that the Director had no authority to execute the agreement, the stand taken in the objections filed by the State is very strange. The stand is that a Committee of Management of the Stadium Committee headed by the
- 20 -
Hon'ble Minister was appointed to manage the stadium. It consists of Government officers and the Municipal Commissioner. We fail to understand what legal authority the Committee possessed to take a decision to enter into an agreement with the third respondent. Admittedly, a fair and transparent process was not followed before entering into an agreement. Public notice was not given and applications were not invited from other organizations. Though the stand of the third respondent that it has spent huge amounts for developing the stadium, even assuming that it is true, it is besides the point as no other entity was allowed to compete with the third respondent. If the State had followed fair and transparent process, some other entity could have done better than what the third respondent has done.
11. Now, it is an admitted position that the licence agreement has come to an end. In fact, a letter dated 21st April 2017 was addressed by the third respondent to the
- 21 -
Additional Chief Secretary of the Government, in which it is accepted that the agreement would come to an end on 31st May 2017. By the said letter, extension was sought by the third respondent. Though the agreement expired on 31st May 2017, on 11th August 2017, the Secretary of the Stadium Management Committee allowed the third respondent to utilize the stadium as a home venue for National and AFC competition Football matches for a long period from 11th August 2017 to 31st May 2018. Here again for a period of eight months, the stadium was allowed to be used by the third respondent without following a fair and transparent process. Moreover, the terms and conditions on which the third respondent was allowed to use the stadium for such a long period of eight months have not been set out. It is not clear as to what is the authority of the Secretary of the Stadium Managing Committee to allow the third respondent to use the stadium for a long period of eight months without fixing any terms and conditions.
- 22 -
12. The learned Additional Government Advocate has tendered the letter dated 3rd July 2019 addressed by the Secretary of the Youth Empowerment and Sport Department, in which an assurance has been given that hereinafter the stadium will be allowed to be used by the third parties only after following a fair and transparent process. We accept the said assurance given by the State.
13. Though there is no need to grant relief now as the agreement between the State Government and the third respondent has come to an end, surely the State Government will have to hold an enquiry about the manner in which the public property was allowed to be used by the third respondent by execution of the agreement dated 22nd May 2014 and thereafter by granting permission dated 11th August 2017.
- 23 -
14. At this stage, we may make a reference to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Krishan Lal Gera -v- State of Haryana and others2 wherein the Apex Court has observed that creating a sports ground and encouraging the sports is a part of the human resource development which is the function of the State Government. The Apex Court held that no part of the stadium/ground can be allowed to be run by a private entrepreneur. The State Government will have to frame a proper policy for utilization of the said stadium by the third parties so that members of the public are able to have the benefit of the stadium and modern facilities created therein.
15. As observed by the Apex Court in the case of Akhil Bharatiya Upbhokta Congress (supra), we are not suggesting that only an auction should be conducted by the State Government. However, after framing a rational 2 [(2011) 10 SCC 529]
- 24 -
policy, the procedure as contemplated by the decision of the Apex Court in paragraph-67 of the said decision must be followed by the State Government.
16. Accordingly, we dispose of the petitions by passing the following order:
a) We direct the appropriate authority of the State Government to hold an enquiry relating to the manner in which third respondent was granted a licence dated 22nd May 2014 and the manner in which the third respondent was allowed to use the stadium for the period between the 11th August 2017 and 31st May 2018. The State Government shall go into the legality of both the actions and initiate an action in accordance with law;
b) The Inquiry shall be held by the State Government in the light of the law laid by this court in this judgment;
- 25 -
c) Needless to add that the State Government shall initiate action against those who have indulged in the illegality by allowing the third respondent to use the stadium without following a fair and transparent process;
d) Though we are disposing of these petitions, the disposed of petitions shall be listed on 14th October 2019 for reporting compliance with these directions;
e) We accept the assurance given by the State Government that the possession of the stadium or any part thereof shall not be parted with or shall not be encumbered without following a fair and transparent process;
f) We direct the State Government to frame a policy dealing with the stadium and its usage in the context of the law laid down by the Apex Court. Even the compliance of this direction shall be reported to the Court;
- 26 -
g) The petitions are accordingly disposed of with the above observations and directions;
h) The disposed of petitions shall be listed on 14th October 2019 under the caption of "Orders" for reporting compliance by the State Government.
Sd/-
Chief Justice Sd/-
Judge DM