VINEY MITTAL, J. - (1.) THE petitioner Indraprastha Colony Plot Holders Association (hereinafter referred to as the "petitioner-Association") claiming itself to be an association of about 400 plots holders has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The prayer made in the petition is for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to accord the benefits of section 8 of Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") to the petitioner. An additional prayer has been made for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing exemption orders dated August 30, 1985 and November 20, 1992 issued by the respondents. Still further, a prayer has been made for restraining the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 from granting a completion certificate to respondent No. 5 in respect of Indraprastha Colony.
(2.) THE necessary facts may be noticed as under : It has been claimed by the petitioner-Association that it has 400 members who were plot holders and is a registered association under the Societies Registration Act vide Registration Certificate dated September 29, 1971 Annexure (P/1). It has further been claimed by the petitioner-Association that it jointly owns approximately 48 acres of land known as Indraprastha Colony in village Itmadpur in District Faridabad in the State of Haryana. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-Association through Shri R.C. Khanna, the then President of the petitioner-Association, who is stated to have since died, on the authority of a resolution dated March 4, 1997 (Annexure P/2). As per the averments in the writ petition, respondent No. 5 M/s. Swatantra Land & Finance Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Colonizer-Company") in the year 1962-63 advertised that they had acquired land measuring about 100 acres for the development of a Colony known as "Indraprastha Colony" adjacent to Delhi in village Itmadpur (presently failing within District Faridabad). The aforesaid advertisement was repeated by the Colonizer-Company in the year 1965-67. A copy of the aforesaid advertisement appearing in the Hindustan Times has been appended as Annexure P/3 with the present petition. As per the aforesaid advertisement tarred roads, sweet water, tubewells with electric connection, sewerage, drainage etc. were to be available to the plot holders. It is claimed by the petitioner-Association that the price of the plots varied from Rs. 17/- to Rs. 50/- per sq. yard as per the assurance given by the Colonizer-Company. The petitioner-Association claims that these plots were "purchased by the petitioner against a well-defined contract and all the payment terms were covered with firm receipts. The rates of plots varied according to category, location at the time of booking. The petitioner duly completed all the formalities including payment of all instalments within the time period as specified in the contract." A photocopy of one such application along with payment receipt in favour of one Shri Pushpa Khanna has been appended as Annexure P/4 with the present petition. It is further claimed by the petitioner-Association that it has paid the entire price of the plots with a view to construct their houses but they were misled by the Colonizer Company from time to time. It is further claimed that in the year 1967 the Colonizer Company by their letter dated January 7, 1967 called upon all the plot holders to make an extra payment of Rs. 6/- per sq. yard for additional external development charges. The petitioner-Association further claims that the plot holders duly complied with the new terms and conditions although it is stated that "it was not a part and parcel of the original contract as envisaged at the out-set. Till today despite making the entire payment to the Colonizer-Company, the petitioner has not received the possession of even a single plot of land for the last 30 years." A document showing the extent of payment by some of the individual plot holders is annexed as Annexure P/5 with the petition. In the year 1963 an enactment known as The Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas (Restriction of Unregulated Development) Act, 1963 (hereinafter called the "1963 Act") came to be enacted. After the enactment of the aforesaid 1963 Act, the Colonizer-Company was required to seek permission and clearance as required under the enactment. The petitioner-Association has averred that the Colonizer took steps under the aforesaid enactment for the grant of licence etc. In the year 1971, another enactment, namely, Haryana Restriction on Development and Regulation of Colonies Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred as the "1971 Act") came to be enacted by the State of Haryana. After the enforcement of 1971 Act, the Colonizer-Company was required by the provisions of aforesaid Act to get the requisite clearance, permission and approval under the aforesaid enactment. The Colonizer-Company accordingly moved the competent authority under the 1971 Act for granting the requisite clearance and approval. Ultimately, in the year 1975, the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") was enacted by the State of Haryana. It is the case of the petitioner-Association that after the enforcement of 1971 Act the Colonizer-Company applied for exemption of the aforesaid colony under Sections 9 and 23 of the Act. Ultimately on August 30, 1985 the State Government of Haryana granted conditional exemption to the Colonizer for setting up a colony. The aforesaid exemption was -ranted to the Colonizer-Company upon certain terms and conditions mentioned therein. A copy of the aforesaid exemption order dated August 30, 1985 in favour of the Colonizer-Company issued by the State Government of Haryana under Section 23 of the Act has been appended as Annexure P/6 with the present petition. The petitioner-Association has complained that the terms and conditions of 1985 exemption letter were not complied with by the Colonizer-Company but on the contrary in the year 1987 the aforesaid company demanded a higher amount from the plot holders and issued a revised contract to be signed by them. The aforesaid revised payment and contract took the petitioner completely by surprise. Accordingly in the year 1991 the petitioner-Association made a complaint against the Colonizer-Company. On November 20, 1992 a further exemption to the Colonizer-Company for an additional area of 3.31 acres for the development of the Colony was granted. In this manner, the total exempted area came to be 51.81 acres. The aforesaid exemption in the year 1992 was also granted upon certain terms and conditions. The aforesaid order for additional exemption dated November 20, 1992 has been appended as Annexure P/9 with the present petition. The petitioner-Association has further averred that the Colonizer-Company has failed to comply with the conditions stated in the exemption letters of 1985 and 1992 and has acted in collusion with the authorities to deny the plots in the said colony to the petitioner-Association, The petitioner-Association made complaints to various authorities including the Chief Minister of Haryana. On August 9, 1993 the petitioner-Association made another complaint addressed to respondent No. 1, namely, Secretary Department of Town and Country Planning, Haryana. In the aforesaid complaint also it was stated by the petitioner-Association that exemption under section 23 of 1975 Act being a serious matter and there being a violation of the aforesaid terms and conditions, the authorities were bound in law to take action in the matter under Section 8 of the 1975 Act. Similar complaints to various authorities are stated to have been made by the petitioner-Association or some of its office bearers. Thereafter a Civil Writ Petition was filed before the Delhi High Court being C.W.P. No. 340 of 1999. However, the aforesaid writ petition came to be withdrawn by the petitioner-Association on May 27, 1999 with a liberty to them to pursue the remedy in an appropriate forum in accordance with law. A copy of the order dated May 27, 1999 has been appended as Annexure P/20 to the present writ petition. It is in these circumstances and with the background noticed above that the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-Association with the prayers as noticed in the opening para of the judgment.
(3.) IT may not be out of place to mention that when this writ petition was pending at the motion stage, the petitioner-Association moved an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for impleading such plot holders/owners who had subsequently acquired rights/plots in the Colony. Accordingly a list of 59 persons being new allottees was furnished by the petitioner-Association and the aforesaid persons were ordered to be added as the respondents.;