L.DEBORAH PASWETT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. P.Agarwal, learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner.

(2.) It is submitted by the learned counsel that the grievance of the writ petitioner is with regard to the stoppage of construction of her house by the respondent No. 2 on the ground that such construction cannot be done within 10 meters of a Defense installation. It is further submitted that the writ petitioner had preferred representations before the respondent No. 2 with regard to the non-grant of a No Objection Certificate for the building and though a joint inspection was carried out, there was no positive outcome with regard to the No Objection Certificate for building. She therefore, submits that in such a situation, the writ petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court by the present writ application seeking directions as to why the respondents should not be directed to allow the petitioner to construct her house on her plot of land.

(3.) Dr. N.Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M.Myrchiang, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3, at the outset has drawn the attention of this Court to the statements made in paragraph 9 and 10 of the affidavit, wherein he submits that the stand of the respondents is that 35% - 40% of the land stated to be the land of the petitioner falls under Defense land, and that a request has been made to the respondent No. 4 (Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills District) to cancel the No Objection Certificate which was granted on 21/2/2023. The learned DSGI has also referred to a letter dtd. 1/2/2023 which is annexed at Annexure-IX to the affidavit, whereby a request has been made to the respondent No. 4, to conduct a joint inspection and for the writ petitioner to be informed to be present for the same. He therefore submits that however, due to the pendency of the instant writ petition, the matter has not been carried forward.