AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In para 4 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated as under:
“4. That in reply to the averments made in para-1 of the writ petition, it is humbly submitted that construction of park near Balangi College, Badkhua, Balasore under Balasore Municipality has been started after following the Govt. Rules & procedures. The construction work of the said park has been started out of the Central Scheme “AMRUT” “(Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation) and not from any funds allotted by the Hon’ble Member of Parliament as alleged. The proposed park will be constructed over Plot No.1999, 1999/2516 and 2001 of Khata No.1150 under Mouza-Sunhat, Unit No.30 which are not pond in kisam. The renovation of the Pond on Plot No.2000, Kisam Jalasaya (Pond) having an area of Ac 4.165 dec. will be done as per action plan utilizing the funds under Odisha Urban Infrastructure Development Fund (OUIDF) so that it may be better utilized after it’s renovation and it will be useful by the general public for bathing and day to day use and other recreational purpose in future.
It is not a fact that these Opp.Parties are constructing the park by closing the big pond measuring with an area of Ac 4.165 dec. pertaining to Plot No.2000, rather Municipality is taking effective steps of the renovation of the traditional water bodies which was not renovated for decades by utilizing required funds and constructing park over the vacant land near the pond as a result the scenario of the locality will be beautified.
Further the proposed site where the park is being constructed was an unused land covered with shrubs and bushes located on an open space and near educational institutions like College and school and the objective is for development of the locality for the larger interest of the general public.”
The rejoinder to para 4 of the reply simply makes assertions to contrary without any supporting documents. In the circumstances, the Court is not satisfied that there is any valid basis for the Petitioners’ assertion that the proposed park is going to come up on land which is earmarked as Kisam Jalasaya.
In that view of the matter, there is no purpose in continuing the status quo order. The interim order is vacated. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
……………………….