The campaign group fighting to save Mapledurham Playing Fields has also sought legal advice and commissioned a London barrister to write to the leader of the council, Cllr Jo Lovelock.

The Chronicle has seen the letter, dated March 9, from barrister Alexander Learmonth, commissioned by the Mapledurham Playing Fields Action Group, calling into question the legality of including the playing fields on the list.

The complainants call into question the way Reading Borough Council — a trustee of the land — has conducted itself during the £35,000 public consultation.

Mr Learmonth wrote: “It appears to us that the council has already failed in its duty as trustee by allowing the fields to be put forward as an option in the consultation without any resolution by the trustee as to whether a sale of land can be contemplated at all.

“The trustee ought, in our view, immediately to resolve that the sale of any land is not a step the charity should contemplate, and therefore that the fields are not an option for the school’s location.”

As the sole trustee of the trust which owns Mapledurham Playing Fields, Reading Borough Council made a decision at a policy committee meeting last December to create a sub-committee as the new trustees of the land.

Gordon Watt, of the action group, said: “Last year they proposed to divide and create a sub-set of councillors who would become the trustees to avoid a conflict of interest but our barrister and the Charity Commission say that is not allowed. That manoeuvre was illegal.”

Mr Watt added that the Albert Road Recreation Ground, also on the list, is equally invalid as a possibility.

As well as trying to protect the park lands from any development, the campaigners also believe the council’s failure to voice concerns could be undermining the ongoing public consultation.

Mr Watt, said: “If I were a stake- holder of some other site and I thought I was protecting mine by voting for Mapledurham I would be cross if I found out that it was not viable. It is a wasted vote for people, this will distort the consultation.”

A Charity Commission spokesman confirmed it had received a complaint against Reading Borough Council.

It said: “The commission is in the process of contacting the council as trustee to ask for clarification on the position regarding the land and any possible disposal.”

The playing fields and Albert Road Recreation Ground are both owned by Reading Borough Council through charitable trusts and are protected by covenants as recreation land.

The two Caversham parks were included in a list of five potential sites by the Education Funding Agency in its on-going attempt to find a permanent home for the school.

Reading Borough Council spokesman Anna Fowler said: “The Council has a statutory role as Planning Authority and Local Education Authority.

“The setting up of the sub-committee was done so as to recognise the potential implications of the different interests of the Local Authority and to separate out the different roles to minimise the potential conflicts of interest or challenges on the grounds of bias and predetermination.

“All the sites included in the Heights Primary School consultation were wholly selected by the Education Funding Agency.

“The Council is carrying out the consultation on the EFA’s behalf and it is the EFA — not the Council — who will determine which site if any, it wishes to make a proposal in respect of once the Council has passed the consultation data to it.”