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

2021 Supreme(UK) 727

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Verma
Special Appeal No. 205 of 2021
RAMKISHAN AND OTHERS – Appellants
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. – Respondent
Decided on : 30.07.2021

Advocates:
For the Appellant : Mr. Tapan Singh, Learned Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. K.N. Joshi, Learned Dy. Adv. General, Mr. Rahul Consul, Learned Counsel and Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Learned Counsel

Headnote:

Special Appeal – Against order passed by Single Judge – Appellants challenged the order – Issued by Development Authority – Informed the appellant that since they have raised illegal construction – Illegal construction would be demolished – Determination of – Admittedly, in present case, petitioners have raised construction of their building – Without seeking prior permission of Development Authority – Building sealed – Compounding application – Dismissed – Petitioners is unjustified in claiming that petitioners are being discriminated against in a hostile manner – Development Authority is justified in issuing notice to petitioners that it will demolish illegal construction raised by them – It is, in deed, a settle principle of law that a Court can never be a party to an illegal act – High Court does not find any illegality or perversity in impugned order – Special Appeal dismissed. (Paras 11 to 15)

fo’ks”k vihy & ,dy U;k;ewfrZ }kjk ikfjr vkns’k ds fo:) & vihykFkhZx.k us ml vkns’k dks pqukSrh nh & fodkl vf/kdkjh@izkf/kdkjh }kjk tkjh & vihykFkhZ dks lwfpr fd pw¡fd voS/k fuekZ.k dj pqd gSa & vr% mDr fuekZ.k /oLr fd;k tk;sxk & vo/kkj.k & Lohd`r :i ls izLrqr ekeys esa] ;kfpdkdÙkkZx.k fodkl izkf/kdkjh dh iwoZ vuqefr izkIr fd;s fcuk & vius Hkou dk fuekZ.k dj pqds gSa & Hkou lhy fd;k x;k & ‘keu gsrq izkFkZuki= & [kkfjt & ;kfpdkdÙkkZx.k ;g nkok djus esa U;k;ksfpr ugha gS fd ‘k=qrkiw.kZ rjhds ls muls HksnHkko fd;k tk jgk gS & fodkl izkf/kdkjh ;kfpdkdÙkkZx.k dks uksfVl tkjh djus esa U;k;laxr gS fd og muds }kjk mBk;s x;s voS/k fuekZ.k dks /oLr djsxk & ;g okLro esa] fof/k dk ,d lqLFkkfir fLFkfr gS fd U;k;ky; dHkh Hkh fdlh vfof/kd d`R; dk i{kdkj ugha gks ldrk gS & mPp U;k;ky; vk{ksfir vkns’k esa dksbZ voS/kkfudrk vFkok vuqfprrk ugha ikrh gS & fo’ks”k vihy [kkfjtA ¼izLrj 11 ls 15½

JUDGMENT :

The Court made the following:

(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan)

Aggrieved by the order dated 07.06.2021, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1048 of 2021, the appellants have preferred the present Special Appeal. By the said order, the learned Single Judge had dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellants-writ petitioners, wherein the appellants-writ petitioners had challenged the order/letter dated 11.05.2021 issued by the Haridwar

Roorkee Development Authority. By the said order, the Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority had informed the appellants-writ petitioners that since they have raised illegal construction, the illegal construction would be demolished on 27.05.2021.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as arrayed in the Writ Petition.

3. This case has had a chequered history, which is as under:-

The petitioners claim to have inherited a property, located in Khasra No. 652, in Village Rawli Mehdoodpur, District Hardiwar. According to them, on 04.06.1986, the Haridwar Roorkee Development Authority (in short “the Development Authority") was notified as a Development Authority. Consequently, thirty-nine villages of District Haridwar were included within the territory declared as part of the Development Authority. The property belonging to the petitioners fell within the area demarcated as under the jurisdiction of the Development Authority.

The petitioners raised an illegal construction in the early part of the year 2017. Consequently, a neighbor, namely Mr. Mange Ram, who is involved in litigation with the petitioners, filed a complaint before the Development Authority. Consequently, on 25.02.2017, the Development Authority sealed the building belonging to the petitioners. Immediately, the petitioners filed an application for seeking compounding of their illegal construction. However, by order dated 03.08.2017, the Development Authority rejected their application; it passed an order for demolition of the building belonging to the petitioners. Since the petitioners were aggrieved by the order dated 03.08.2017, they filed an Appeal before the Commissioner, Garhwal Mandal, Pauri Camp, Dehradun, the respondent no. 3. However, by order dated 23.08.2017, the respondent no. 3 dismissed their Appeal.

Aggrieved by the order dated 23.08.2017, the petitioners filed a Revision Petition before the Additional Chief Administrator, Uttarakhand Housing and Town Development Authority, Dehradun, the respondent no.2. However, even the said Revision Petition was dismissed by order dated 06.12.2017.

Aggrieved by the said order, dated 06.12.2017, the petitioners filed a Writ Petition, namely Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3294 of 2017, before this Court. But, even the said Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court by its order dated 26.06.2018.

Aggrieved by the order dated 26.06.2018, the petitioners filed a Special Appeal before a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court. By judgment dated 08.08.2018, the learned Coordinate Bench dismissed the Special Appeal.

However, it seems that the Development Authority did not take any action against the petitioners from 08.08.2018 till 11.05.2021. Thus, the Development Authority sat quietly over the entire issue for a period of almost three years. It is only on 11.05.2021 that the Development Authority issued a notice to the petitioners informing them that it plans to demolish the illegal construction raised by them, on 27.05.2021. Since the petitioners were aggrieved by the said notice, the petitioners filed a Writ Petition before a learned Single Judge of this Court. However, by the order dated 07.06.2021, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition. Hence, the present Special Appeal before this Court.

4. Mr. Tapan Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioners, has raised the following contentions :-

Firstly, the petitioners have invested a huge amount of money in raising the building. Therefore, if the demolitio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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