Disposed

Suresh Kumar and Ors. v. Commissioner Municipal Corp. Gurgaon and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Jan 2017CWP/12219/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order declaring their land for common passage and sewer lines without prior acquisition. The court held deprivation requires compensation and implementation of the notice shall be kept in abeyance until acquisition procedure, if needed, is followed.

What did the court decide?

Notice dated 08.04.2010 to be kept in abeyance until acquisition procedure is followed; grievance against deprivation of land without compensation redressed.

Suresh Kumar and Ors. Vs Commissioner… — Municipal and Town Planning | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CWP No.12219 of 2013 (O&M)

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.12219 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision:19.01.2017

¶5

Suresh Kumar and others ... Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon and others ... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶9

Present:Mr. R.S.Malik, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶10

Mr. Sandeep Singh Mann, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

¶11

Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶12

Mr. Madhu Ranjan, Advocate, for Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for respondents No.5 to 15.

¶13

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

¶14

The petitioners are aggrieved of the impugned order dated 05.01.2011 (Annexure P-5), whereby, their land has been declared to be used for the purpose of common passage and lying of drainage/sewer lines etc.

¶15

The contention of the petitioners is that without following the procedure under the Right of Fair and Compensation Act, 2013 or the Municipal Corporation Act 1994, the order cannot be implemented.

¶16

Mr. Mohnish Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 submits that no acquisition proceeding before passing of

¶17

Savita 2017.01.23 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶18

CWP No.12219 of 2013 (O&M)

¶19

{2}

¶20

the order has been taken place and the possession is still with the petitioners being owners.

¶21

No person can be deprived of the land without paying any compensation which is violation of the provisions of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. The authority should have indulged into passing of such order, in case, the authority is actually in need of the area for the purpose of common passage and lying of drainage/sewer lines etc. The notice dated 08.04.2010, Annexure P-4 shall not be implemented but shall be kept in abeyance till the procedure for acquisition of the land, if necessity arises, is followed.

¶22

With the aforementioned observations, grievance of the petitioners and respondents No.5 to 15 is redresssed.

¶23

Writ petition stands disposed of.

¶24

	(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
January 19, 2017
savita
Whether Speaking/Reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶25

Savita 2017.01.23 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Suresh Kumar and Ors. v. Commissioner Municipal Corp. Gurgaon and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar and Ors. v. Commissioner Municipal Corp. Gurgaon and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pale Ram and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S Marshal Construction Company Vs Haryana Urban Development Authority & Ors.

Dharamvir Singh Dhankhar Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Om Pal Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Chanchal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Kulwinder Kaur and Ors. Vs Presiding Officer & Ors.