BALJINDER SINGH Vs. GMADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of aforementioned five writ petitions. For brevity, facts have been taken from this case i.e. CWP-40368-2018 wherein petitioners have posed a challenge to notices issued under Sections 79 and 143 of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 (hereinafter to be referred as PUDA Act, 1995) stating that construction of the petitioners falls within no construction zone and is liable to be demolished. Their representation has, thus, been rejected and they were asked to remove the unauthorized constructions immediately, failing which, coercive action shall been taken forthwith. The relevant Para of the order dated 04.12.2018 passed by Additional Chief Administrator, GMADA, reads as under:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners have vehemently urged that there is no master plan notified by the GMADA for the area, in question. The Additional Chief Administrator, GMADA is, thus, not authorized to invoke Section 79 and 143 of the PUDA Act, 1995 to direct the demolition of the construction raised by the petitioners.

(3.) On a query being put to Mr. Khosla, learned counsel representing GMADA, he fairly submits that local planning area has not been extended after 30.06.2018 though a communication to this effect has been sent to the Government. On the statement made by Mr. Khosla, this court has no option but to infer that there is no master-plan under Section 70 or regional planning area as per Section 56 of the PUDA Act for the area, in question, wherein construction has been raised by the petitioners. He has, however, pointed out that the construction may violate certain provisions of different statutes such as the Punjab Scheduled Road and Controlled Area Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 and the Punjab Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1964.