Surinder Batra, Advocate vs State of Haryana and Others

Jawahar Lal Gupta, J.—The petitioner, an advocate, complains that the Papiha Tourist Complex of Fatehabad, has been arbitrarily and illegally converted into Deputy Commissioner''s residence-cum-Camp Office. The petitioner further complains that a civil park measuring 6/7 acres of land which had been reserved for use by the residents of the area in the layout plan of the Model Town was transferred by the Municipal Committee to the Tourism Department. It was being maintained properly and used by the public. However, on the decision of the Government to constitute the Fatehabad District, the Deputy Commissioner has ploughed the entire park with the help of tractors and in the process has uprooted and destroyed the entire plantation in the area and has carved out fields for the purpose of sowing agricultural crops". The petitioner alleges that the conversion of a fully operational Tourist Complex into the Deputy Commissioner''s residence-cum-Office has "caused huge loss to the publicex-chequer and great inconvenience to the public at large". He prays that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the respondents to restore the Tourist Complex and the park to the original position.

A Short written statement has been filed on behalf of the Secretary, Tourism Department, Government of Haryana, (Respondent No. 2). It has been averred that a piece of land "measuring seven acres of municipal park belonging to Municipal Committee, Fatehabad was transferred to Tourism Department by the Government . .........vide its sanction dated 15.6.1992 for setting up a new Tourist Complex at Fatehabad. This land was transferred free of cost on the basis of the terms and conditions contained in Resolution No. 2, dated 3.12.1991, passed by the Municipal Committee, Fatehabad that Tourism Department would develop a beautiful park at its own cost on the remaining land after constructing the Tourist Complex. The Complex was constructed and commissioned in August, 1994. A park was also developed there as per terms and conditions of the Municipal Committee, Fatehabad," In July, 1997, the Government decided to make Fatehabad a new District Headquarter. Vide order dated July 11, 1997, it was decided that the "Papiha Tourist Complex at Fatehabad be converted into Deputy Commissioner''s residence-cum-Camp Office for the time being, for which necessary rent as assessed by P.W.D. (B & R) be paid to Haryana Tourism Corporation." According to the decision of the Government, this is "a temporary measure till the construction of Deputy Commissioner''s residence is completed. In compliance with the orders of the Government, the Corporation issued orders on July 16, 1997, for closing down the complex and handing over its possession to the District Administration "for the residence of Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad". The Tourism Department will commence the functioning of the Complex again "as soon as the premises are handed back to it by the State Government."

A separate written statement has been filed by Mr. P.C. Bidhan, Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad. Respondent No. 4. The allegation that the land surrounding the Camp Office has been converted into agricultural fields, has been denied. It has been averred that "the provisions of residence- cum-Camp Office for Deputy Commissioner in the District was essential for its smooth and efficient functioning more so when this district has been newly created........Being centrally located the present location of Deputy Commissioner''s Camp Office is accessible to the general public. In the absence of any other suitable building it was considered advisable to convert the Papiha Tourist Complex temporarily residence-cum-Camp Office of Deputy Commissioner.........a large number of dignitaries and V.I.Ps. visit the Camp Office of Deputy Commissioner in the normal course of events and since there was no suitable accommodation in the town except the present one and as such the same was taken in view of the totality of compelling circumstances". The fourth respondent further avers that "there was congress grass standing on the land in certain pockets which is hazardous to residence (residents) of the adjoining area from medical point of view......The same was got removed and de-weeded. No plantation has been uprooted and destroyed". It is maintained that the action "should not cause any loss or inconvenience to anyone including the petitioner......... The Government has already earmarked land for the construction of D.C. Residence in Fatehabad on H.U.D.A. Land and the construction is expected to begin shortly."

The case had come up for hearing on September 26, 1997. The respondents were asked to "give details of the amount of expenditure incurred on converting/furnishing etc. for the Deputy Commissioner". Initially, it was sought to be represented on behalf of the respondents that an amount of Rs. 64,672/- had been spent on "the conversion residence-cum-Camp Office......" This was the expenditure on masonary, wood work and white washing etc. Another amount of Rs. 12,283.75 had been spent on ''curtain cloth''. The Bench suspected that the respondents were withholding certain information. Consequently, the respondents were asked to furnish the complete details. The case was taken up on September 30, 1997. Therefore, a statement of the expenditure "on the purchase of furniture and fixtures upto now after creation of the district" was filed. According to this statement, an amount of Rs. 5,54,109.05 had been spent on various items of furnitures and fixtures. Both these statements are on record as Mark ''A'' and Mark ''B. In pursuance of the directions of the Bench, the Deputy Commissioner had also filed an affidavit to indicate that the various items were being used only in the office and not in the residential portion of the premises. Still, further in pursuance of the directions of the Bench, an affidavit of the Managing Director, Haryana Tourism Corporation was filed to indicate as to what had happened to the staff and the furniture which had been initially installed at the Complex. The affidavit was filed by Mr. Rajan Gupta, the Managing Director of the Corporation. It was stated that "the staff posted in the said Tourist Complex was shifted/transferred to other Tourist Complexes vide office orders dated 8.7.1997 and 15.7.1997. The "building of the said Tourist Complex alongwith some material was handed over to the Government on rent basis. The rent........is being got assessed through the P.W.D. (B & R) Department, Haryana. A list of the material handed over to the Government alongwith the building is enclosed as Annexure R-4 with the affidavit.........certain movable materials were also shifted to other Tourist Complexes. The details of which are attached as Annexure R.5 with the affidavit."

Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, counsel for the petitioner contended that the action of the respondents in converting the Tourist Complex into a residential accommodation for the Deputy Commissioner was wholly illegal, arbitrary and, thus, untenable. On behalf of the respondents, it was emphasised that it was only a temporary arrangement and thus, it should be allowed to continue.

The only Tourist Complex in the District alongwith seven acres of land has been converted into the residence-cum-Office for the Deputy Commissioner. The "Octogonal hall with - length and width of 34'' and 24'' respectively.....average height......15''" is the "Camp Office Chamber" of the Deputy Commissioner. To top it all, lacs have been spent to furnish it. All this in a State which is genuinely trying to bear the loss of hundreds of crores for enforcing the policy of prohibition. Not only this, the entire staff employed at the Complex had to be uprooted and adjusted in other Units. The expensive furnishings had to be shifted to other places. Families which were living on the wages from the Complex were moved out of Fatehabad. Nobody was bothered about the inconvenience caused to the various families. The expenditure involved in their shifting was irrelevant. The denial of a facility of a convenient place to stay and/or eat to the hundreds of people for whom it had been initially created, was of no consequence.

All this to accommodate one officer. Probably, such a thing would not have been allowed to happen even when we were slaves and were being ruled by foreign Sahibs.

Those who are charged with the duty of administering the affairs of the State should not be pompous. Even in a State of prosperity, they ought to be economists. The useless and avoidable expenditure on the fancies and frolics is a weight on the poor people who work with bare hands and bent backs. It is an avoidable burden on the meagre resources of the State. It is an instance of extravagance beyond all bounds. We cannot compliment the State on such unrestrained, excessive, profuse, wasteful and lavish expenditure. We shall do well to remember that economy in itself is a source of revenue. Everyone must refrain from indulging in avoidable expenditure. When the expense exceeds the means, the outgoings exceed the incomings, the State cannot prosper. It is only moving on the road to debt. This backdoor robbing of tax payers'' money must stop.

Besides the above, we also strongly suspect that there is a deliberate attempt to with-hold information form the Court. To illustrate : Mr. P.C. Bidhan, the Deputy Commissioner was personally present in Court. He had produced before us the communication from the Executive Engineer indicating that a total expenditure of Rs. 64,672/- had been incurred on the conversion and an amount of Rs. 12,283.75 had been spent on the purchase of curtain cloth. The Bench had adjourned the case on September 29, 1997 to September 30, 1997 and it was only on the insistence of the Bench that further expenditure of Rs. 5,54,109.05 was disclosed. Still further, one of the items was an ''air-conditioner'' which had been purchased. Mr. Bidhan had stated that it had been installed in the office. On being further questioned by the Bench, he had conceded that it had been installed in the bed-room. Later, in his affidavit dated October 12, 1997, he had explained it by saying that "it was considered necessary and desirable to install and test the same for checking whether it was working properly and effectively". The respondents were also asked to explain as to what had happened to the furniture etc. which had been installed in the Tourist Complex. In response to the directions of the Bench, an affidavit was filed by the Managing Director of the Tourism Corporation. The list of various items which were handed over to the Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad on July 14, 1997, has been appended as Annexure P.4, while the list of movable material shifted from the Complex to other places has been produced as Annexure R-5. What happened to the beds and beddings in different rooms of the Complex ? There is no specific mention in this behalf in either of the two lists. It has only been mentioned at Sr. No. 8 in Annexure R-5 that "complete furniture of two rooms with carpet" has been shifted to Lake View Surajkund. What about the carpets in the other rooms ? What about the other items of furniture ? The affidavit and the lists-both are silent.

We are left with a feeling that the officers who have filed these affidavits have not been fair to the Court. We record our displeasure. We cannot compliment the respondents on their action in converting a public facility into the residence for one officer. We cannot imagine that there was no suitable accommodation where the Deputy Commissioner could have stayed for some time. It is not unknown that people far senior to a Deputy Commissioner discharging very onerous duties have spent months and months in single room accommodations in various rest houses etc. Be that as it may, we trust that the State genuinely means to treat the conversion as "temporary". It would proceed to construct the residence of the Deputy Commissioner as it promises. Thereafter, the Complex shall not be restored to its original use. The needful in this behalf shall be done on or before December 31, 1998 and a report shall be filed in Court.

The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.