SUSHANTA TAGORE AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2005] 2 S.C.R. 502 · Decided: 03-03-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N. SANTOSH HEGDE · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
SUSHANTA TAGORE AND ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
MARCH 3, 2005 
[N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND S.B. SINHA, JJ.] 
Visva Bhardti Act, 1951-Sections 5, 6 and 7 and II Schedule-
Construction of residential and Commercial Complexes within Shantiniketan-
C Public Interest Litigation challenging the construction-Only a portion of the 
Scheduled area acquired by University-Direction of Pollution Control Board 
for preservation of ambience of University for cultural, historical, 
archaeological, environmental and ecologicalpurposes-~High Court dismissed 
the PIL on the grounds that University was not the owner of entire 3000 acres 
of land and that allowing Shantiniketan in its original form would be 
D impractical-On appeal, held : Jn view of the statutory scheme, the tradition 
and special features of the University should be preserved-Directions issued 
by Pollution Control Board are binding on the State as well as the Sriniketan 
Shantiniketan Development Authority-Though town development is job of 
town planning Authority, but such town planning should be done not only 
E having regard to provisions of one statute, but also the provisions of other 
statutes especially those for protection and preservation of ecology and 
environment-Though the construction not stopped but the Authority cautioned 
to keep in mind in future the statutory provisions and the observations of 
Court in this judgment-West Bengal Town and Country (Planning and 
Development) Act, 1979-Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 21and5/A(g) 
F and Part JV. 
Visva Bharati Act, 1951 was enacted with a view to preserve and 
protect the uniqueness, tradition and special features of Visva Bharati 
University. The powers of the University conferred under the Act was 
G restricted to area specified in Second Schedule appended to the Act which 
was Shantiniketan admeasuring 3000 hectares. Out of the 3000 hectares, 
1761 acres were acquired for the University. Pollution Control Board had 
issued certain directions for. preservation and conservation for cultural, 
historical, archaeological, environmental and ecological purposes. 
Appellants-residents of Shantiniketan filed Public Interest Litigation 
H 
502 
--
SUSHANTA TAGORE v. U.0.1. 
503 
aggrieved by indiscriminate constructions and in particular proposed A 
constructions which were likely to come up in the area known as 'khoai' 
which were responsible for defacement of ambience and environment of 
Visva Bharati. High Court dismissed the public interest litigation holding 
that University being not the owner of the entire 3000 acres of land no 
relief could be granted; that though the construction would change the 
topography of Shantiniketan in the canal front, there was no public interest B 
calling for restraint of such a change; that the building activity in 
accordance with the spirit and ideas of Rabindranath Tagore was not 
practical. 
In appeal to this Court, appellant contended that the issue in the Writ C 
Petition must be considered having regard to the purposes for which the 
Act was enacted, its preamble and statement of its Object and Reasons. 
Respondent-Builder contended that the State having exclusive 
legislative competence regarding town planning, the Parliamentary Act 
cannot interdict in the areas covered by the State; that by reason of such D 
constructional activities neither the academic programme nor the 
academic territory of the University were affected; that Writ Petition was 
rightly dismissed, University itself not having claimed any ownership in 
respect of the land beyond what has. been acquired for its purpose; that 
most of the appellants being residents within the area of 3000 acres cannot 
challenge the constructional activities within the Scheduled area. 
E 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. Visva Bharati Act, 1951 was enacted with the consent of 
the State of West Bengal. The State, having regard to the purport and 
object of the Act, has, thus, a duty to see that the environmental ambience F 
which would not be in consonance with the ideals of Visva Bharati, should 
not be undertaken. Visva Bharati is sui generis. It is an institution of 
national importance. It is a unitary teaching and residential University. 
The jurisdiction of the University is not only confined to the area specified 
in the Second Schedule appended to the Act, as regard its academic G 
activities but in view of Section 6(32) of the Act it may establish campuses 
within the territoria

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.