- (1.) This order shall dispose of CWP No.6425 of 2007 challenging the show cause notice dated 12.03.2007 (Annexure P-32) and claiming a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the building plans, maps, documents etc. submitted by the petitioners college. CWP No.10452 of 2009 is also being decided with the present writ filed-by the same petitioner whereby the petitioner claims that respondents No.1 and 2 be directed to initiate disciplinary proceedings against respondent No.3 for having been found guilty of various omissions and commissions in the enquiry reports dated 05.04.2007 and 24.12.2007 appended with this petition as Annexures P-1 and P-2 and to initiate proceedings against respondent No.3 for demanding bribe of Rs.20 lacs to spare the college building from demolition.
(2.) The petitioners claim to have established two institute i.e. Anupama College of Engineering and Anupama Institute of Management. The petitioners claim that the Director Technical Education, Haryana has granted 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioners vide its letter dated 27.07.1996. The affiliation was given by the Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak on 18.06.2004 and that the extension of approval was given by the Finance-cum-Principal Secretary, Technical Education, Govt. of Haryana vide his letter dated 19.05.2006 for the academic session 2006-2007 for conducting the engineering courses. The petitioners also rely upon the approval granted by All India Council for Technical Education vide its letter dated 5.11.2003. Both institutes of the petitioners are located in the area before it became the part of the 'controlled area' w.e.f 05.08.2005 in terms of the provisions of the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restrictions of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 ( for short- the 'Act').
(3.) The entire dispute in the present petitions is as to whether the building in which the petitioners are said to have been running the institutes is constructed prior to the publication of the notification dated 05.08.2005. If the construction has been raised prior thereto, the provisions of the Act are not applicable but, if the petitioners are proved to have constructed the building after the publication of the notification dated 05.08.2005, then the construction is in violation of the provisions of Section 5 of the Act as no construction would be permissible without permission.;