The Court thus declined to quash Condition No. 40 of a Letter of Allotment which states that the Authority allots the space at its discretion, and the allottee must accept whatever site the Authority earmarks, with no legal right to demand a particular location or extra space. However, the Court directed the Authority to earmark the space within two weeks.

The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the allottee of Main Manasbal Park with amusement facilities at Manasbal, including the Children's Park, which was outsourced to the petitioner in terms of Letter of Allotment.

A Bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal, while disposing of the petition, observed,

"This Court is conscious of the fact that business interests must make a way for public interest, particularly when the public interest involved concerns the preservation of ecological balance in an eco-sensitive area such as the Wular-Manasbal region. Therefore, Condition No. 40 cannot be quashed in any manner whatsoever."

Background:

In terms of the Letter of Allotment Main Manasbal Park with amusement facilities at Manasbal, including the Children's Park at Safapora, was outsourced to the petitioner for a period of three years. The petitioner's grievance was that Condition No. 40 contained in the Letter of Allotment did not exist in the original e-Bid document and, therefore, could not have been imposed upon the petitioner.

Respondents filed its response stating that in terms of Clause 20 of the e-Bid document, the successful bidder is under an obligation to abide by all directions issued by the Wullar Manasbal Development Authority, failing which the contract is liable for cancellation.

It was further stated that Clauses 13 and 35 of the e-Bid document clearly provide that the outsourcee shall not raise any additional infrastructure within the outsourced property or undertake any addition or alteration in the premises without obtaining prior permission in writing from the Authority.

Respondents contended that the petitioner was never permanently prohibited from installing amusement facilities but was only advised and apprised of the eco-sensitivity of Manasbal Lake and its banks.

It was also stated that continuous diesel emissions and noise pollution cannot be permitted in such an ecologically sensitive area, and that the location, nature and type of equipment are required to be determined by the competent authority keeping in view environmental concerns, pollution, safety considerations, safety of visitors, preservation of green spaces and the larger public interest.

Court's Observation:

The Court reproduced Condition No. 40 of the Letter of Allotment, which provides that the location, area, and extent of space to be provided for installation and operation of amusement equipment shall be determined solely by the Wular Manasbal Development Authority, and that the allottee shall install the equipment only at the site earmarked by the Authority and shall not claim any specific location or additional space as a matter of right.

The Court noted in the submission of counsel for the petitioner that in terms of Condition No. 40, the Authority is required to earmark the space for installation of the amusement equipment by the petitioner, and that no such space had been earmarked till date.

The Court observed that business interests must make way for public interest, particularly where the public interest involved concerns the preservation of ecological balance in an eco-sensitive area such as the Wular-Manasbal region. The Court accordingly held that Condition No. 40 could not be quashed in any manner whatsoever.

It thus disposed of the petition by directing respondent No. 3 to specify a suitable location, in terms of Condition No. 40 of the Letter of Allotment, so that the petitioner is able to install and operate the amusement facilities in accordance with the tender conditions and the applicable permissions.

The Court directed that while taking such a decision, respondents shall duly take into consideration the ecological and environmental concerns of the area, including the sensitivity of Manasbal Lake and its surrounding areas.

Case Title: Abdul Ahad Bhat vs UT of J&k

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Click here to read/download Judgment