SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 607

1996(3) Supreme 374
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.
G.N. Khajuria & Ors. -Appellants
versus
D.D.A. & Ors. -Respondents
I.A. No. 2 In Civil Appeal No. 7933 of 1995
Decided on 18-3-1996

Headnote:Delhi Development Authority-Development plan-Area earmarked for part-No indication that it was intended to be allotted to any third agency-Illegal allotment of land earmarked for part in favour of a school-Notice issued to have school vacated and park presented-No follow up action persued-Complaint by residents-Order for vacating school and dismantling the same-Observations made regarding the report submitted by Chief Planner, Ministry of Urban Affairs-Person responsible for deviation and illegal allotment could not be pin pointed. (Paras 1 to 3)

       

ORDER

Time for vacating the school and dismantling the same as per the judgment of this Court, as prayed for, is extended till 30th April, 1996.

2. Though Shri D.S. Meshram, Chief Planner, Town and Country Planning Organisation, Government of India, Ministry of Urban Affairs and Employment has submitted the report dated November 17, 1995. Unfortunately, he has not adverted to the impact of the order of this Court nor has he brought to bear up the subject in that perspective. He has conducted only superficial enquiry and stated only that is apparent and nothing more. He should have subjected the enquiry to in depth scrutiny but failed to do that. His report is like that of a clerk putting up the note and nothing more. However, we have carefully gone through the record annexed to the report. From the record, it is clear that originally the area was earmarked for the part and there was no indication that it was intended to be alloted to any third agency in the land earmarked for the park. In fact, the Vice-Chairman also had pointed out time and again in that behalf. He had also issued notice to have the school vacated and the park preserved. Though noticce pursuant thereto was given, no follow up action was persued. Resultantly, the residents had to take up the matter and ultimately succeeded in getting the order from this Court.

3. We tried to scan the person responsible for deviation and illegal allotment but it is difficult in the circumstances to pin point the actual person responsible in that behalf. He had skillfully managed and had camouflaged to have the authority after getting the plain approved introducing the allotment of the site to the school. Since the plan was approved ultimately by the Lt. Governor, it went under the carpet of official action. He has escaped from the clutches of law. Therefore, nothing can be done in the circumstances. Report is accordingly closed.

 

*******

Parallel Citatons of other Journals :

G.N. Khanjuria & Ors. v. D.D.A. & Ors., 1996(3) Supreme 374 : JT 1996(4) SC 7

00018

00019

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top