2000 (10) TMI 976 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Review of the judgment and order dated 27-6-2000 in CWJC No. 6694 of 1999.
2. Maintainability of the writ petition filed by non-parties to the main case.
3. Legitimacy of the construction on National Highway 31 by Rotary Club, Begusarai.
4. Allegations against the previous set of lawyers representing Rotary Club, Begusarai.
5. Conduct of lawyers and litigants in the proceedings.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Review of the Judgment and Order Dated 27-6-2000:
The petitions sought a review of the judgment and order dated 27-6-2000, which directed the removal of a double-storied pucca building constructed by the Rotary Club, Begusarai on plots of land forming part of National Highway 31. The Court had determined that the construction was on public land reserved for the highway, based on a survey map and the unequivocal statements of the District Magistrate, Begusarai.

2. Maintainability of the Writ Petition:
The writ petition was filed by individuals who were neither parties to the main case nor had any concern with the issues therein. The Court found this writ petition to be frivolous and an act of irresponsibility, as it was intended to support the civil review petition. The petitioners claimed their locus standi based on monetary contributions to the construction of the building, which the Court rejected as insufficient grounds.

3. Legitimacy of the Construction on National Highway 31:
The Rotary Club, Begusarai had constructed a building on land forming part of National Highway 31, which was undisputed. The primary question was whether the land was part of the highway. The Court relied on a survey map certified by the Collector, Begusarai, and the District Magistrate's statements, which conclusively showed that the plots were within the highway's boundaries. The Court dismissed the review petition's claim that new material (an enquiry report dated 3-5-2000) justified the construction, noting that the report did not present any new facts and was based on a misconceived idea of the road's boundaries.

4. Allegations Against Previous Set of Lawyers:
The review petition alleged that the previous lawyers representing the Rotary Club made unauthorized and incorrect concessions. The Court found these allegations to be incorrect and false. The previous lawyers, Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Mr. R.B. Mahto, filed a detailed affidavit refuting the allegations and describing the proceedings. They had informed the Rotary Club's representatives about the likely adverse outcome based on the survey map, and the representatives had accepted the situation and requested time to vacate the premises.

5. Conduct of Lawyers and Litigants:
The Court expressed strong disapproval of the conduct of the petitioners, particularly in the civil review petition, and highlighted the need for regulatory mechanisms for lawyers. The Court suggested framing rules similar to the Supreme Court's Advocates-on-record system to prevent such issues in the future. The Court emphasized the importance of verifying facts with previous lawyers before filing review petitions and proposed that a certificate from the previous counsel or verification by the new lawyer should be appended to review petitions.

Conclusion:
The Court dismissed both the writ petition and the civil review petition, finding them devoid of substance. The allegations against the previous set of lawyers were found to be false, and the Court upheld the original order directing the removal of the building constructed by the Rotary Club on National Highway 31. The judgment also called for regulatory measures to address the conduct of lawyers and litigants in such proceedings.