Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr.Tapan Bhattacharya vs Higher Education Department on 20 December, 2016
W.P. No.7992/2016(PIL)
20.12.2016
Shri A.M. Mathur, learned Senior Counsel with Shri
Abhinav P. Dhanodkar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Ravish Chandra Agrawal, learned Advocate General
with Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned Govt. Advocate for the
respondent Nos.1 and 4/State.
Shri Manoj Munshi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Shri Piyush Mathur, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Akash Vijayvargiya, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.
Additional return on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 4 and reply of respondent No.5 are taken on record.
Heard on I.A. No.6933/2016 an application for amendment of writ petition.
2. By amendment, petitioner sought to add two more relief.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted 15 days time to file reply.
4. Also heard on the question of grant of Interim Relief.
5. By this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner is challenging the allotment of premises, building and using the ground of Government Arts & Commerce College, A.B. Road, Indore by respondent No.5 - Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad for its National Meeting (Conference) from 24th to 27th December, 2016.
6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Conference is going to start on 24/12/2016 and, therefore, he prayed for grant of interim relief and submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of J. Jayalalitha Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors. [(1991) 1 SCC 53], the respondent No.5 be permitted to use the premises of Government Arts & Commerce College subject to furnishing an undertaking that if any damage is caused to the building and ground the same shall be paid by the respondent No.5 and he should furnish a Bank Guarantee of Rs.10 Lakhs and undertaking by the State Government that in future the Government will not grant any permission to use the premises in question for the purpose other than sports and education activity, and this order will not be treated as a precedent and, in future there shall be total ban by the State Government in granting permission for use of College premises for other than sports and education activities. In support of his contention he has drawn our attention to the order dated 9.10.2015 and 2/12/2015 (Annexure-R/6) passed by the Division Bench in the matter of Satish Kumar Verma Vs. District Magistrate, Jabalpur in W.P. No.2831/2010.
7. Per Contra, Shri Ravish Chandra Agrawal learned Advocate General has submitted that the petitioner has made all general and vague allegations based on newspaper reports. The ABVP Students Organization is being tried to co-relate with BJP/RSS without establishing the nexus between them. The allegation of political influence are being raised without any foundation. The petitioner is neither a student nor is related to any students organization in District level, State level and national level. He has no locus to challenge the order of granting permission by the respondent Nos1 and 4 in favour of respondent No.5 and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
8. Shri Piyush Mathur, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent No.5 has submitted that the respondent No.5 is a students organization and they are having National Level Conference at Indore and approximately more than three lakh students are coming to attend the Conference.
9. Shri Agrawal and Shri Mathur, vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of interim relief and contended that the respondent No.5 is a registered organization, under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, with its headquarter at Mumbai. The respondent comprises of around 3 million volunteers including students, teachers, scholars and researchers of academic institutions across the country, which also makes it World's Largest Students Organization. It is a non - political organization, working for the overall welfare and development of the students with the objectives to develop national character and discipline amongst them, without any discrimination of caste, sex etc. The respondent No.5 organization is nowhere associated / affiliated to any political party / group. The society organized its national conference annually across country and this time it was decided to organize in Indore, M.P. Various thematic sessions on issues concerning development and welfare of the youth and their role in various dimensions of society and nation along with parallel sessions on academic issues, group presentation, talent expression and youth Award are amongst the curriculum of the conference, in consonance with the objectives of the respondent organization. The matter was kept in agenda of Janbhagidari Samiti of New Law College, Indore on 3.11.2016. Thereafter, the college authorities granted permission to use their premises, building and ground for the event, after being approved from the Janbhagidari Samiti. No political conferences are being organized by the respondent No.5 and prayed for rejection of grant of interim relief.
10. The ABVP has moved an application for providing the campus/ground for the propose of organizing the event in question. The aforesaid request was considered by the Janbhagidari Samiti and after due deliberation, the college has granted the aforesaid permission on 5/11/2016.
11. At present, more than ten thousand volunteers have arrived at Indore to attend the Conference and the college campurs has been taken for students activities and academic discussion.
12. In the matter of J. Jailalitha V/s. State of Tamil Nadu, reported as 1999 (1) SCC 53 the special permission was granted for non-sports use of sports stadium despite ban.
13. Further, in J. Jailalitha V/s. State of Tamil Nadu (supra) the stadium is under care of Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu, hence the ratio of the judgment of J. Jailalitha V/s. State of Tamil Nadu (supra) does not attract in the present case.
14. In the case in hand, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Government Arts and Commerce College, Indore is having total area of 62 acres and major area has been reserved for expansion of the college. The respondent No.5 in its reply very categorically stated that they are not organizing any political event nor the organization is associated or affiliated with any political party or group.
15. In the case of Satish Kumar Verma V/s. District Magistrate, Jabalpur, the writ petition was filed as pro bono publico with regard to use of Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukla Stadium for the purpose other then sports activity, the district administration after consultation with the said authorities have finalized the scheme identifying the places for permitting the conducting the public meeting Dharna etc, in public place and three different categories of the places have been identified and specific places have been notified for the same. The Collector notified the places by notification dated 12.8.2015 for holding of public meeting, Dharna meeting and other public activities and, therefore, the Division Bench while disposing of the writ petition issued necessary directions and directed that no individual should be permitted to hold or conduct any private functions by misuse of or by blocking the public street or public places.
16. In the present case, the respondent No.5 - Organization is using the premises for other then political activities and, therefore, no case to impose any condition or grant of stay, as prayed is made out. Prayer for grant of interim relief is, accordingly, rejected.
17. List in the third week of January 2017.
(P.K. JAISWAL) (VIRENDER SINGH)
JUDGE JUDGE
ss/- Pn/-