- (1.) THE Ambala Urban Estates Welfare Society is the petitioner. It alleges that even though the respondents lead promised that Sector 7, Urban Estate, Ambala city shall be developed as a residential area with all the modern amenities', it does not have even an underground sullage and storm water drainage system. According to the petitioner, the roads with big pot -holes are virtual death -traps. On account of lack of drainage and sewerage facilities, the cesspools which exist all around are a health hazard. The Haryana Urban Development Authority disputes this. It claims that the plot -holders, have already been given more than what was legitimately due to them. Is it so ? A few facts as emanating from the pleadings of the parties may be briefly noticed.
(2.) IN 1973, The Department of Urban Estates, Haryana gave out that it is "developing residential areas with all the modern amenities at Ambala." It offered plots "for sale on full ownership basis." Various persons who are the members of the petitioner - -Society applied for these plots. They were given letters of allotment during the years 1973 and 1974. They paid prices as mentioned in the advertisement. They were given possession of these plots in the year 1980 -81. Most of them have constructed houses on these plots. In spite of the fact that more than 2 decades have elapsed, the petitioners allege that the respondents have not provided even basic facilities like "underground drainage for storm and sullage water with the necessary provision for the treatment and healthy disposal .." As a result, the ground water level has risen which has caused extensive damage to the buildings. Because of lack of drainage facilities, the area remains waterlogged resulting in spread of malaria and jaundice etc. The petitioner also complains that potable water is not available and various facilities, for which payment had been made by the plot holders, have not been provided. Further, it is alleged that the Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authority') to avoid honouring its obligations, passed an order on November 4, 1988 transferring the ownership of public roads, parks and sewerage etc. to the Municipal Committee, Ambala. Faced with this situation, the petitioner has approached this Court through the present writ petition. It challenges the order dated November 4, 1988 and prays that the 'authority' be directed to provide all the facilities. In response to the notice of motion issued by the Court on May 31, 1989, the Haryana Urban Development Authority had filed a written statement on March 12, 1990. It was inter alia stated on its behalf that "there was no provision for underground storm water drainage in the approved rough estimate of Sector 7, Ambala", and that "the sullage water sewerage is being disposed of regularly and properly. There is no problem of over flowing or choking of sewer at present. The disposal machinery is working properly and smoothly." It further stated that "there is no problem of drinking water and sufficient quantity of good quality potable water is being supplied daily to the residents of Urban Estates, Ambala City." It was also stated that "the averments that locality remains water logged are (is) not correct and thus there is no question of becoming prone to any infectious disease for these reasons." It was submitted that "the basic amenities as per provision in the approved rough cost estimate do exist." On these basis, it was averred that the decision of the authority to transfer the ownership of roads etc. to the Municipal Committee was legal and valid.
(3.) THE petitioner controverted the claim of the authority by filing a replication. Along with, the petitioner produced a copy of the letter dated April 15, 1988 written by the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala to the Chief Administrator of the respondent -authority and Director, Town and Country Planning and Urban Estates, Haryana which clearly belied the assertions in the written statement and in which it was categorically stated that "accumulation of water is at present creating a problem of high water table and consequent damage to buildings." The petitioner also produced the proceedings of a meeting held on January 10, 1990 under the chairmanship of the Administrator of the authority which shows that "the grass sown in these parks is destroyed due to collection of water in the rainy season owing to low level; "the water supply from Tubewell No. 3 was 'brackish'; the roads needed to be repaired; without the storm water drainage, the sewerage system is also choked during the rainy season; the conversion of land use of a plot measuring 1000 sq. mt. into a community hall was already under consideration; a pump station is also required in the Sector and that no provision had been made for disposal of the sullage water and that "at Rresent the affluent is not discharged anywhere." ;