IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 Date of decision: 25.11.2010 M/s Eros City Developers Private Ltd. …..Petitioner versus Union of India and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.A.M.Punchhi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Mukul Aggarwal, Advocate Mr.V.K.Sharma, Advocate Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 & 5 Mr.Rameshwar Malik, Advocate for respondent No.6 Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) Admittedly, in a portion of the land falling in khasra No.52//7, 8, 13, a telephone exchange is in existence. The petitioner, by claiming itself as the owner of the property under possession of respondent Nos.1 to 3, has filed this writ petition with a prayer that the State authorities be directed to hand over vacant possession of the land in unauthorized occupation of the respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that the land was purchased by B.P.Jain and sons Private Limited vide registered sale deed dated 28.5.1993 (Annexure P2). Thereafter name of the company was changed to M/s Eros City Developers Private Ltd. i.e. the petitioner. The land in dispute measures .66 acres. It is averred by the petitioner that the land in question, Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 along with a huge chunk of contiguous land had been purchased by the petitioner and its Group Companies, for the purpose of establishing a colony in the name of “Lakewood City”. Two separate licences bearing Nos.147 and 148 of 1955 have been obtained from the Director, Town and Country Planning for establishment of the colony (Annexure P3 and P4), and the development work relating to the colony is being carried out in full stream. The grievance in this present writ petition relates to a portion of land bearing khasra No.52//7, 8, 13 in possession of respondents, which is causing undue delay in execution of the project. It was stated by the petitioner that the execution of the Project was delayed, on account of a blanket ban imposed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in a Public Interest Litigation, initiated by Shri M.C.Mehta, by order dated May 10, 1996, passed in I.A. 29 in writ petition (Civil) No.4677 of 1985 (Annexure P5) It is only on May 13, 1998 that the ban, earlier imposed vide order dated May 10, 1996, was removed, which paved and cleared the way for the petitioners to carry out the execution of the Project, by order dated May 13, 1998 (Annexure P6). It is further averred that a lease deed was executed in favour of respondent No.6 by the State of Haryana to extract mine and minerals from the land in dispute along with a vast tract of land for a period of five years. That lease period is over but the land is still in possession of the respondents. Further it was stated that in month of February 1993, the office bearer of the Congress party organized All India Congress Session in village Lakkarpur. Lacs of persons from all over India had come to attend this Session. Several Members of Parliament, Members of Legislative Assemblies, party functionaries and other workers were participating in the Session. In order to provide telecom facilities to the VIP’s, approximately 6 2 Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 kanals of land, forming part of khasra Nos.7 and 8, Rectangle No.52 in village Lakkarpur, tehsil and district Faridabad, was handed over by the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad to respondent No.3 for setting up a temporary telephone exchange in the area in dispute, after getting permission from the Chief Administrator, Faridabad Complex Administration, vide letter dated 24.2.1993. In any case, only a temporary structure had been set up to meet the urgent requirements of providing telecom facilities to the VIP’s on account of All India Congress Session. It is specific case of the petitioner that it is an absolute owner of the land and it was never acquired by the State authorities, so the possession of the respondent is unauthorized. Despite the requests made, the authorities have failed to vacate the land of petitioner or in the alternative acquire the same. The petitioner then out of utter frustration served a notice demanding justice in February 2001 (Annexure P9), upon respondents No.2 and 3, in which it was clearly indicated that the land forms part of the Layout Plan for a sanctioned Colony (Lakewood City) and the continuance of the temporary structure was proving to be a major hindrance and preventing it from properly developing the colony, causing grave and irreparable loss to the petitioner. It was urged that a Government authority is not expected to behave in such a manner and that they should remove the temporary structure and vacate the land in dispute. Still no action in the matter was taken. After almost a year, the petitioners even served a Legal Notice on 18.1.2002 (Annexure P10), calling upon respondent No.2 to vacate the land, which is in their illegal occupation, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice. The petitioners also claimed damages for use and occupation @ ` 10,000/- per 3 Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 month for a period of three years, preceding the service of the notice. In the sum of ` 3.60 lacs. Upon notice, reply has been filed. Respondent No.5, the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad has specifically admitted that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are not the owners of the land in which telephone exchange is situated. It is further stated that neither erstwhile Faridabad Complex Administration nor the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad had received any money from respondent Nos.1 to 3 for use and occupation of land in question. In reply filed at the instance of respondent Nos.1 to 3, it is averred as under:- “It may also be further relevant in this regard to mention that the petitioner claims that the superstructure with the telephone exchange is functioning situate in khasra No.7 and 8 of Rectangle No.52 in village Lakkarpur Tehsil and District Faridabad. However, a perusal of the sale deed appended at Annexure P-2 shows that khasra No.8 of Rectangle No.52 is not the part of the land which was the subject matter of the said sale deed. The petitioner is, therefore, prima facie not owner of the land in khasra No.8, Rectangle No.52 village Lakkarpur which is allegedly part of the land on which the superstructure housing the telephone exchange exists.” It was further averred that the land is under lease with respondent No.6. The petitioner in order to answer the above said objection put on record the sale deed vide which land falling in khasra No.52 and khasra No.8 was purchased by it. Respondent No.6 was also added as a party. It is also admitted by respondent Nos.1 to 3 that many letters were 4 Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 written to the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad to acquire the land in question, however, without getting any response. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have also filed CWP No.19901 of 2004 wherein a prayer has been made that directions be issued to the State of Haryana to acquire the land in question, by invoking the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. By noting facts mentioned above, this Court on 5.10.2004 passed the following order:- “Admittedly, the property, in dispute, does not belong to respondents No.4 to 6, who are stated to have put respondents No.1 to 3 in possession thereof. It is also not disputed that no proceedings were ever initiated for acquisition of the disputed property. Mr.Rathee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, prays for an adjournment in order to ascertain from his clients as to whether they have any proposal for arriving at a settlement with the petitioner, out of Court.” Thereafter, nothing was done. No effort was made to settle dispute outside the Court or to start the proceedings to acquire piece of land owned by the petitioner. After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that act of the respondents/ State authorities is illegal, unjustified and irrational. It is apparent from the records and not disputed before us by making reference to any revenue document that the land under telephone exchange is the ownership of the petitioner. Temporarily, possession of the said land was handed over to respondent Nos.1 to 3 by the Chief Administrator, Faridabad Complex Administration on 24.2.1993. Relevant portion of the letter reads thus:- 5 Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 “The Faridabad Complex Administration on the approval of Government have decided to transfer 0.66 acres of land bearing khasra Nos.52/13 in the revenue estate of village Anangpur belonging to the Faridabad Complex Admn. For the installation of electronic telephone exchange required for the improvement of telephone facility in the Surajkund area. You may kindly take over the possession of this land. The rate, cost of structure and the terms and conditions shall follow. Map showing the site is attached herewith.” It is also not disputed before us that when this piece of land was handed over to respondent Nos.1 to 3, construction already existing was raised by respondent No.6/ lessee as its site office. Respondent No.6 is also claiming compensation for the construction raised by it to the extent of Rs.1,85,000/-. There is no reason with the State authorities to deny rightful claim of the petitioner. Except misusing the vast State powers, the authorities in this case have shown no sense of responsibility which the officials owe to the citizens of the Country. It is not expected of a public authority, performing public duties to be in illegal occupation of a private land. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 have behaved like an undisciplined king and have tried to defeat rights of the petitioner without any justification worth the name. Neither the land was acquired nor even s single penny was paid to the petitioner for its use and occupation. It is a classic case in which the State authorities are responsible for creating this unnecessary litigation. It is also very surprising that despite the requests made by respondent Nos.1 to 3, no steps were initiated by the Deputy Commissioner and the State of Haryana to acquire the land in question. 6 Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 At this stage, we will refer to the following portion of the preface to 1964 paper book edition of the book titled “The Modern State” by Maciver:- "The state has no finality, but human nature is as stable as human needs, and what human beings need from government - if we think not of the few, but of men generally, men as social beings - is the same under all conditions. These are liberties secured by restraints, justice under law, order that provides opportunity, the economy of the good life. The modes of satisfying these needs change with the changing conditions. To satisfy any need whatever, even the most spiritual, a modicum of power is necessary, for power is simply the effective control of means. From the beginning of human history government has been recognized as the overall holder and regulator of power, maintaining order by limiting all other expressions of power and thereby turning permitted powers into rights. In that concept lay the rudiments of the principles of government. In every age men have sought to clarify the application of these principles to the changing times. In every age the abuse of power by governments has led to disasters and uprisings, oppressions and vainglorious wars, and sometimes to experiments in the control of power, seeking to make it responsible, or more responsible, subject in some manner to the will of the people, of the majority or those who represented them." Under the circumstances in this case, we are left with no other option but to allow this writ petition and direct respondent Nos.1 to 3 to 7 Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002 vacate the land and hand over its possession to the petitioner. Needful shall be done within a period of two months. For unnecessary harassing the petitioner, we burden the respondents with costs of Rupees Seven lacs out of which Rupees five lacs shall be paid by respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Rupee one lac each by respondent No.4 and 5. Amount be paid within two months. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 25.11.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 8