Sachidananda Pandey vs State of West Bengal & Ors

By – Punya Rai

In The Supreme Court of India

NAMESachidananda Pandey vs State of West Bengal & Ors
CITATION1987 AIR 1109, 1987 SCR (2) 223
PETITIONERIndian Council for Environment Legal
RESPONDENT      Union of India & ors.
BENCH/JUDGE  Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, Justice V. KHALID                             


It was held that at whatever point an issue of environment is brought under the watchful eye of the court, Art 48-An and 51-A(g) should be thought of. The job of the legal executive was likewise talked about. It was underscored by the Supreme Court that the obligations under Article 51-A, although being a mandate guideline, will not be overlooked by the court. The Court might analyze whether proper contemplations are taken while fostering an arrangement under Article 51-A.


This case is known as the town arranging case. For this situation, the Government of West Bengal awards rent to the Taj Group for 4 sections of land having a place with Calcutta Zoo consistent Garden for the foundation of 5-star lodgings.

2. This parting with of this 4-section of land to the Taj bunch tested by the PIL request by the Secretary of the association of workers of zoological nursery and the live individual from the zoo.

3. Allure was made in the Supreme court in regards to the development of this inn which prompted the aggravation to creatures in the zoo and upset the biology of the plant life and the plants will have vanished as an unfavourable impact.

4. Secretary communicated its resistance to the proposition of development of lodging on a place that is known for the zoo. The Committee’s protests were twofold:

a. A multi-celebrated structure nearby the zoo will upset the creatures and the natural equilibrium and will influence the bird relocation.

b. the land was at that point utilized for different purposes, that is, grain development, the graveyard for creatures, clinic, activity theatre, isolate region, posthumous room and nursery.

5. As indicated by the Committee, it is difficult to oblige these fundamental administrations inside the grounds of the principal zoo.

6. The charges made by the Managing Committee were first raised before Minister for Metropolitan Development who presented a note to the Chief Minister calling attention to a similar issue.

7. The Chief Minister after bringing the claims expressed that these offices were fundamental for the zoo.

8. From that point forward, the Managing Committee turned around its previous stand and consented to the proposition on the confirmation that neighbouring area and coordinating with awards would be given to the zoo. 9. Because of all the conflict made by the litigant and respondent, the court presumed that charges made by the appealing party was outlandish and the court excused the writ


•        Whether the respondent is at risk for the production of ecological contamination?

•        Whether the supposition made by the focal government is legitimate?


Dr L. M. Singhvi, learned guidance for the benefit of appellants made the accompanying entries under the steady gaze of the court: Begumbari land was legally vested in the Managing Committee of the Zoological Garden. It was additionally battled that the land ought not to be rented to the Taj Group of Hotels without offering a greeting to the delicate from volunteers and without following the necessities of passages 166 and 167 of the land Manual. The choice was taken by the authority disregarding the unfriendly effect on the zoo and without talking with different intrigued specialists and establishments. The same the Director of the zoo, the Managing Committee of the zoo, the Public Undertakings Committee of West Bengal, the Indian Wildlife Board, driving ornithologists of the nation and so on Goes against the endorsement given to the Taj Group of Hotels. These people and organizations had given a few explanations behind the dissatisfaction, and none of them was considered by the Government. Consideration was not given by the public authority to this matter for the protests as the Cabinet Memorandum disregarded such complaints. As per the learnt counsel, it was presented that the choice wasn’t right taken by the public authority as it depended on just suppositions. Also, the suspicions were made without appropriate enquiry and examination. As indicated by the appealing party the deficiency of ecological annihilation is too high to even consider being discounted. Besides, the terms were hindering to the public income which is considered for giving the rent of land.


Then again, Shri Dipankar Gupta, learned direction for the Taj G        1roup of Hotels and Shri Gooptu learned advice for the State of West Bengal argued that that finishing was intended to energize the travel industry at would not upset any of the biology frameworks. Alongside this, it works on the environmental factors of the spot. For this, the court favours the Stand and attested by respectable adjudicator Justice Chinnapa Reddy

Equity Chinnapa Reddy said that “Clearly if the public authority is alive to the different thought requiring considerations and consultation as shown up at the cognizant choice after considering them, it may not be for this court to meddle without malafide”.

It was additionally fought that if the unloading ground and the graveyard moved to some other spot that it will be more sterile. It was clarified that there will be no obstruction to the trip of the meeting birds as the lodging was to be developed at 700 feet from the lake and was to ascend to the most extreme tallness of 75 feet, being a medium ascent and not an elevated structure. It was likewise battled that there would have been a natural improvement of the space as the unloading ground, graveyard and the semi-bedraggled structures were to be supplanted by a lodging encompassed by expansive streets. There was no event for the public authority to welcome tenders since the foundation of a five Star inn was not something that could practicably be embraced by anybody in that style. As indicated by them, it was just be finished by leading exchange meeting between the people.


The Hon’ble Supreme court alluded to the instance of R.D. Shetty v. Global Airport Authority [1], wherein the court saw that the exercises of the Government had a public component and on the off chance that it entered any agreement, it should do as such decently without segregation and without uncalled for strategy. At whatever point the Government managed people in general, regardless of whether via giving positions or entering agreements or giving portions or licenses or allowing different types of larges, the Government couldn’t act discretionarily at its sweet-will yet should act in congruity with principles or standards without being discretionary, silly, or insignificant. On the off chance that the Government left from such norm or standard regardless of cases, its activity was at risk to be struck down except if it very well may be shown that the takeoff was not self-assertive however depended on some substantial rule which was not silly, absurd, or oppressive.

Hence, on the thought of the multitude of realities and conditions of the case, the court was fulfilled that the Government of West Bengal acted impeccably true blue in giving the rent of Begumbari land to the Taj Group of Hotels for the development of a Five-Star lodging in Calcutta. The Government of West Bengal didn’t neglect to think about any applicable thought.

In this way, direct arrangement with those who approached with recommendations to develop Five Star Hotels was without question the most sensible and objective method of continuing in the matter instead of welcoming tenders or holding a public sale. There was nothing unfair in the strategy received since no other driving hotelier showed any tendency to approach. It was the offer of an administration property. Accordingly, public closeout was essentially precluded. Just Taj Group of Hotels approached with a proposal to begin the lodging.

The standards of Natural Justice teach rules fundamental for deciding the exemplary activity of the Government. It has two fundamental segments are ruling against inclination and the right to a reasonable hearing. The court equitably noticed that the standards of Natural Justice have been noticed and that the individuals who are generally keen on the Zoological Garden were heard in the matter before the choice was taken. The proposition to rent the Begumbari land was public information. The invested individuals in the matter like the Managing Committee of the Zoological Garden and the Director of the Zoo expressed their opinion in the matter. The Public Undertakings Committee in its report talked about the matter and welcomed the Government’s thoughtfulness regarding different components. The matter was additionally examined on the floor of the Legislative Assembly. Thusly, it was difficult to concur that there was an inability to notice standards of Natural Justice.

It was likewise all around noticed that the Government was alive to the contemplations advanced by the boards of trustees and intrigued well creatures. For example, the report by the open endeavour council was given significance as it referenced that the development of a five-star lodging close by would lessen the rearing capability of the creatures in the zoo and would be negative to the moving birds. The goal by the Managing board of the Zoo set forth that the development would remove the feed development land and accordingly, would almost certainly move the offices on that land to the premises of the Zoo. The Chief Minister of West Bengal guaranteed them that if any further offices are required it will be given by the public authority. Additionally, the rent was the summit of a long, elaborate, and open method with nothing to shroud which thusly can’t reasonably be dependent upon antagonistic analysis.

Moreover, the Government of West Bengal and the Taj bunch borne as a main priority the trip of the transitory birds and that s why the design of the development was not to be over 75 feet regardless of being a few high rises previously inherent the region. It was never really liberated the course of the trip of the birds. It was additionally consented to curb lights in the lodging, keeping environmental elements of the inn and the greenery all around kept up with, in light of a legitimate concern for the birds.

Every last bit of it reflected very clear that the Taj bunch had given every one of the confirmations important to save the Zoo and its detainees. It has additionally concurred that an activity theatre, mortuary, veterinary division, and such would be built another bearing the expense of Rs. 30 lakhs, which the Taj bunch were qualified for being repaid under provision 25 of the rent, yet intentionally surrendered.

The court was likewise informed that all-around 30000 plants were preparing to decorate the encompassing space of the development.

Accordingly, there was no question that the public authority didn’t take any in advance thought of standards of Natural Justice, environment and the transient birds.


As per my view, the case was extremely questionable as it depended on the force of the court to practice its obligation over the Government choice. Court likewise attested that” Public interest is the principal in all issue Nothing ought to be done which gives an appearance of predisposition, jobbery or nepotism.”

Taking everything into account the court accepted that State is the legitimate the real proprietor of the regular assets as a trustee of individuals and even though it is enabled to appropriate something very similar, the interaction of dissemination should be directed by the sacred standards including the regulation of balance and bigger public great which as indicated by my view is an earlier objective for the watchman of a country.

Leave a Reply