JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Both these petitions have been preferred by the present
petitioner for the same relief on identical grounds and are being
disposed of by this common order. Facts leading to the filing of
these petitions are that the petitioner is owner in possession of land
measuring 10 bighas and 17 biswas comprised in Khewat Nos.
247 to 249 in Village Anangpur, Tehsil and District Faridabad.
(2.) The petitioner purchased the aforesaid land vide two sale deeds
dated 12.10.1989. The first sale deed is in respect of land
measuring 3 bighas and 4 biswas executed by one Mahipal Singh
son of Het Ram resident of Anangpur Tehsil and District
Faridabad whereas the second sale deed is in respect of land
measuring 7 bighas and 13 biswas executed by one Vipan
Marwah son of Tilak Raj resident of E-231, Greater Kailash, New
Delhi. These two sale deeds are placed on record as Annexures P-
1 and P-2. The petitioner claims to have taken possession of the
property under sale from the vendors. Two mutations bearing
Nos.4009 and 4010 were also sanctioned by the competent
authority on 18.10.1989 (Annexures P-3 and P-4). It is alleged that
after taking over the possession of the land in question, including
the cottage, cow huts, horse huts, toilets, servant room, store room
etc., the petitioner renovated the main building as well as the
kitchen and the change room and also got the boundary wall
constructed. The petitioner applied for change of land use from
agriculture to residential purpose to the Municipal Corporation,
Faridabad (respondent no.2). An agreement in form of CLU-III
was executed dated 4.12.1995 by charging the composition fee of
Rs.1,22,924/-. Copy of the composition order has been placed on
record as Annexure P-6. The aforesaid composition order was
followed by another composition order dated 5.12.1995
(Annexure P-7). The petitioner has also placed on record receipts
of payment in the form of composition charges of Rs.1,22,924/-
and Rs.84,400/-. After compounding, the Municipal Corporation
also sanctioned the plan on 5.12.1995. The sanctioned plan is also
placed on record as Annexure P-10. It is stated that thereafter
respondent no.2 issued a show cause notice dated 26.6.1996
(Annexure P-11) regarding cancellation of permission for change
of land use on the ground that the ownership documents submitted
by the petitioner were not proper, in view of Section 2 (g) of the
Punjab Village Common Land Act, 1961. The petitioner was
asked to appear in person in the office of respondent no.2 on
28.10.1999 at 3.00 p.m. in case he is willing to be heard. The
petitioner submitted his reply dated 28.10.1999 to the show cause
notice through his advocate. It is stated that after the reply was
submitted by the petitioner to respondent no.2, further proceedings
on the show cause notice were deferred. A communication dated
2.2.2000 from respondent no.2 to the petitioner in this regard has
been placed on record as Annexure P-13. From the perusal of this
communication, it appears that in view of the document submitted
by the petitioner regarding composition of the unauthorized
construction and pendency of RSA No.1936 of 1987, further action
on show cause notice has been deferred. It is alleged that the
petitioner applied to the Consolidation Officer for correction of
Khasra Girdawari on 5.4.1996. On this application of the
petitioner, AC-II, Gurgaon directed the kanungo Consolidation
vide his letter dated 5.6.96 to inspect the spot and after verifying
the area and Khasra Number regarding the possession of the
petitioner, spot inspection report be submitted to him (Annexure
P-15). Kanungo carried out the spot inspection in presence of
Halqa Patwari, Lamberdar, the writ petitioner, one Uday Chand,
MLA on behalf of Municipal Corporation and some other persons
and submitted his report certifying that in land measuring 10
Bigha 17 Biswa, there are pucca boundary wall, one Gobar plant,
one kothi, kitchen, dining hall, staff room, power house i.e.
Generator Room, store, basement, Tennis Court, Fruit Trees. The
report also certifies the possession of the petitioner as is evident
from Annexure P-17. The petitioner has also relied upon a report
of the Halqa Patwari to the Consolidation Officer certifying the
possession of the petitioner as owner in Khasra No.58 measuring
10 Bighas and 17 Biswas. In this report, it has also been mentioned
that the petitioner has raised loan of Rs.27,50,000/- from PNB
Housing Finance (Annexure P-18). Patwari's report also mentions
about construction of six feet long pucca boundary wall alongwith
one Gobar gas plant and presence of cattle like cows, dogs, ducks,
hens etc. It is alleged by the petitioner that on 15.7.2003, officials
of respondents accompanied by police personnel about 200 in
numbers demolished the part of the construction of the petitioner
illegally and unlawfully. The first writ petition CWP No.11724 of
2003 has been filed in respect of the demolition of the
construction of the petitioner. In this writ petition, the petitioner
claimed following reliefs:-
"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that in view of the above stated
facts and circumstances of the case:-
i.The records of the case may kindly be called for by this Hon'ble
Court and after a perusal of the same;
ii.a writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued by this
Hon'ble Court declaring the action of the respondents in
demolishing the walls and other structures at the farm house of the
petitioner as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
iii.It is further prayed that a writ in the nature of prohibition may
kindly be issued by this Hon'ble Court restraining the respondents
from further demolishing the farm house of the petitioner.
iv.It is further prayed that the respondents may kindly be restrained
from removing the building material lying in the site of the
petitioner.
v.it is further prayed that as a preventive measure to protect the
petitioner, his family members and the animals including cattle's,
dogs etc. from being harmed, the petitioner may kindly be
permitted to raise the boundary wall which has been illegally and
unauthorisedly demolished by the respondent authorities.
vi.It is further prayed that a writ in the nature of mandamus may
kindly be issued by this Hon'ble Court directing the respondents to
compensate the petitioner to the tune of Rs.20 lacs on account of
the illegal action of the govt. authority and its agencies in
unauthorisedly demolishing the structures of the petitioner and for
causing mental agony, harassment and undue hardship to the
petitioner and his family members.
vii.Or any other order or direction to which the petitioner is found
entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be
passed by this Hon'ble Court.
(3.) This writ petition was admitted to hearing vide order dated
25.10.2005. It is alleged that the petitioner apprehended further
illegal action on the part of the respondents and thus issued a
notice dated 12.12.2003 to the respondents no.2 and 3 through his
counsel requesting them that if any notice in future is to be served
upon the petitioner, the same may be served through his counsel
who is duly authorized. The case of the petitioner is that even
thereafter on 9.9.2006, respondent no.3 accompanied by
respondents no.5 and 6 and about 100 police personnel alongwith
staff came to the property of the petitioner at 11.00 a.m. and
damaged the part of the boundary wall adjacent to the property of
Shri Kartar Singh Duna, a Former Minister of Haryana
Government and caused loss of Rs.5.00 lacs. It is submitted that
the petitioner asked them to show any order of demolition or show
cause notice, but the respondents have failed to show any such
order. According to the petitioner, the entire exercise was illegal
and without any authority of law. The petitioner obtained the
assessment of the loss from the Architect valuer who has assessed
the loss at Rs.5.00 lacs as damage caused to the boundary wall.;