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

2011 Supreme(P&H) 815

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Jasbir Singh and Rakesh Kumar Garg JJ.
Didar Singh
Versus
Jasbir Singh
C.W.P. No. 15528 of 2005,
Decided On : MARCH 18, 2011

Headnote:(A) Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952, Ss.3, 5, 6--Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952--Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, Ss.87, 88 & 89--Controlled Area--Restriction in Controlled area--The provisions of the Periphery Act do not restrict the use of the land in question by its owners but have only put reasonable restrictions on the use of the same--Vision behind enacting Periphery Act was to ensure future extension of the Capital in a healthy and planned way--It cannot be said that the Act gives unbridled and unguided power to the Administration and the provisions of the said Act are discriminatory against the owners of the land or the Administration itself is violating the provisions of the Act--Provisions of the Periphery Act, upheld--Law discussed. (Paras 8, 18, 28, 31 & 33)

       Challenge to the vires of the Periphery Act interalia on the ground that adoption of the Act is not legal and valid--The Periphery Act was framed in 1952 to control and regulate the Periphery of the new proposed capital of State of Punjab i.e. Chandigarh--As a matter of fact the Periphery Act was adopted by the Chandigarh Administration within 2 years from the formation of the Union Territory, Chandigarh as envisaged under the provisions of Reorganization Act--It has become much more important to preserve the area and every individual cannot be allowed to develop the same as per his own choice as the same will lead to an utter chaos--The provisions of the Periphery Act do not restrict the use of the land in question by its owners but have only put reasonable restrictions on the use of the same--Vision behind enacting Periphery Act was to ensure future extension of the Capital in a healthy and planned way--It cannot be said that the Act gives unbridled and unguided power to the Administration and the provisions of the said Act are discriminatory against the owners of the land or the Administration itself is violating the provisions of the Act--Provisions of the Periphery Act, upheld--Law discussed. (Paras 8, 18, 28, 31 & 33)

       (B) Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952, S.12(2)--Unauthorized Construction--Administration issued notices under Ss.12(2) for demolition of the petitioners in violation of the provisions of the Periphery Control Act--No replies has been filed to the aforesaid notices--Instead of submitting their replies to the aforesaid notices, the petitioners have approached High Court--Petitions are pre-mature and liable to be dismissed. (Para 34)

       

Judgment

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.

1. This judgment shall dispose of a bunch of 21 writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 15528 of 2005, 4135 of 2005, 11127, 18024 of 2006, 10464, 10465, 11117, 11407, 10137, 10645, 10177, 11249, 9750, 10892, 10073, 10296, 10309, 10353, 10461, 10462 and 10463 of 2007,.

2. These writ petitions were initially being heard along with CWP No. 5065 of 2007 and other connected matters in which acquisition of land for development of Phase-II and Phase-III of Chandigarh Technology Park in the Periphery of Chandigarh is under challenge. However, during the course of hearing, it was found that in these writ petitions, there is no challenge to the acquisition of land by the respondent-Administration but a challenge has been laid to the provisions of the " Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the "Periphery Act) and declaring the same as ultra vires. In civil writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 10464, 10465, 11117, 11407, 10137, 10645, 10177, 11249, 9750, 10892, 10073, 10296, 10309, 10353, 10461, 10462, 10463 of 2007, even no challenge has been laid to the vires of the aforesaid Act and only a prayer has been made for quashing of the notices issued by the Chandigarh Administration under Section 12(2) of the Periphery Act, 1952 asking the petitioners to demolish the illegal construction made by them.

3. As per the averments, the erstwhile State of Punjab, after losing its Capital at Lahore to Pakistan, proceeded to develop its new Capital at Chandigarh. A committee was appointed by the Punjab Government for the construction of its own capital city which after carefully examining all the factors selected the present site. Thereafter, a master plan of the city was prepared by an American firm. The Committee also appointed an eminent French planner and Architect, Le Corbusier. The city was to be built up in two phases. The first phase covered 9,000 acres of land in the shape of 29 distinct sectors which was increased upto 46 number of sectors; the remaining to be covered in second phase. To translate this concept into a reality, a specific enactment in the form of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Capital Act) was enacted. Another specific enactment in the form of Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952 was also enacted. The aims and objects of the Periphery Act reads as follows :-

"The Punjab Government are constructing a New Capital named Chandigarh. The Master Plan providing for the future extension of the capital will extend over a much greater area than the area acquired so far the construction of the first phase of the Capital. To ensure healthy and planned development of the new city it is necessary to prevent growth of slums and ramshackle construction of the land lying on the Periphery of the new city. To achieve this object, it is necessary to have legal authority to regulate the use of the said land for purposes other than the purposes for which it is used at present."

4. The aforesaid Periphery Act came into force on 12.1.1953 and the same was published in the Government Gazette on 16.1.1953. As per provisions, the Administration declared land within a limit of 5 miles from the outer limits of Capital site of Chandigarh as notified under the Capital Act. Later on the said limits was extended upto 10 miles. as "Controlled Area for the purpose of keeping it reserve for future extension of the City Chandigarh. In view of the provisions of the aforesaid Act, the petitioners were entitled to use the land for the purpose of agriculture and its subservient use with the permission of the Competent Authority until the proper planning for extension of city Chandigarh was made. The relevant provisions of the Periphery Act reads as follows :-

Section 1 Short title and extend and commencement : (1) This Act may be called the Punjab New Capital (Periphery) Control Act, 1952 .

(2) It extends to the area adjacent to and within a distance of five






























































































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