Town planning land reserved as open space cannot be diverted to a private trust without authority of law.

Land reserved as open space under an approved town planning scheme must be used consistently with that scheme, especially to preserve open space, sanitation, recreation and ecological balance. A State Government's general power of direction cannot be used to divert such land to a private trust for a different purpose, and a lease over land the Government did not own or was not entitled to deal with was without authority of law. The text links preservation of open spaces to environmental protection and the right to a healthy life, and states that delay or expenditure by the trust could not legalise an otherwise unlawful allotment. The allotment, lease and construction were invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether the State Government could direct lease of land reserved as open space in an approved town planning scheme to a private trust for construction of a dharamshala, and whether such allotment and the consequential construction were valid.

Analysis: Land vested in the municipality under the approved scheme had to be used in conformity with the scheme and the statutory objects of preserving open spaces, sanitation, recreation and ecological balance. The government's general power to issue directions under the municipal law could operate only to further the approved scheme and not to defeat it by diverting reserved open land to a different use. A lease in favour of a private trust over land that the government did not own and could not deal with as its own was without authority of law. Preservation of open spaces was linked to the constitutional obligation to protect the environment and the residents' right to a healthy life. Delay and expenditure by the trust during pendency of the writ petition did not validate an otherwise unlawful allotment.

Conclusion: The allotment and lease were invalid, the construction could not be sustained, and the appellants succeeded.

---