IMPORTANT POINT
.

Rajesh Bindal J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition praying for the following reliefs:

(i) Challenge to notification dated 11.7.2002 issued by Haryana Government declaring the area around existing boundary of Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation, Industrial Estate of Village Alipur, District Panchkula, to be a controlled area for the purpose of Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (for short, 'the 1963 Act').

(ii) Challenge to notification dated 31.12.2002 issued by Haryana Government declaring the area around existing boundary of Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation, Industrial Estate of Village Alipur, District Panchkula to be urban area for the purpose of Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Area Act, 1975 (for short, 'the 1975 Act').

(iii) Challenge to show cause notice dated 26.7.2002 issued under Section 12 of the 1963 Act.

(iv) Order dated 8.8.2002 passed by respondent No. 3 directing the petitioner to demolish the construction already raised.

(v) Order dated 28.1.2003 passed by the Tribunal constituted under the 1963 Act.

Arguments

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner-company was incorporated primarily for real estate development and colonisation. On 28.8.2001, it entered into an agreement to sell for purchase of 211 kanals and 10 marlas of land @ Rs. 6,25,000/- per acre. Additional land measuring 172 kanals and 5 marlas was purchased vide another agreement to sell dated 16.10.2001 @ Rs. 4,50,000/- per acre. There was specific recital in the agreements to sell that the petitioner could develop a colony on the land and offer for sale the plots so carved out. After entering into the agreements to sell, as per the terms thereof, the petitioner started development work in the area. Firstly, it got a site plan prepared; plots of various sizes from 4 marlas to 10 marlas were carved out; areas were earmarked for common facilities, roads, parks etc. In the month of October, 2001, various advertisements were issued in the newspapers for sale of plots. Simultaneously, the petitioner started developing the area. The process for laying the roads started and so the pipe lines for sewerage and erection of electric poles. The sale was open from 24.10.2001 till 24.12.2001. Allahabad Bank was appointed the banker. 10% of the sale price was to be paid as earnest money; 15% within 30 days from the date of demand and remaining 75% could either be paid in lump sum or in six equal annual instalments with interest. 565 applications were received. Agreements for sale of the plots were executed in March, 2002 between the company and the prospective buyers, where payment option chosen was in instalments. In some cases, sale deeds were got registered in favour of the buyers of the plots in June, 2002, where entire payment was made in lump sum. Reference was made to number of bills and receipts issued by various vendors and contractors, who were carrying out development works at the spot. It was claimed that upto June, 2002, the petitioner had already invested about Rs. 3.50 crores in the project.

3. He further referred to a communication dated 6.5.2002 from Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana to one of the allottees of plot, wherein it has been stated that M/s Shalimar Estate is a private colony situated outside the periphery controlled area. Though on the same date, plan was prepared vide drawing No. D.T.P. (P) 726/2002 dated 6.5.2002 for the purpose of Section 4(1)(b) of the 1963 Act prior to the issuance of notification under the 1963 Act, but still the colony of the petitioner was not shown in the plan. The action was malafide. The judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Vannarakkal Kallalathil Sreedharan v. Chandramaath Balakrishnan and another, (1990) 3 SCC 291 was relied upon to submit that when the sale deed is registered, rights flows from the date the agreement was executed.

4. It was further sub