M/S CITY CROWN HOTELS AND RESORTS PVT. LTD. Vs. THE COMMISSIONER, GURGAON DIVISION, GURGAON, DISTRICT GURGAON AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This litigation is an example of the growing menace of greedy land developers and bounty seekers in Gurgaon's rapid urbanization and their quest to make not just the proverbial 'quick buck' but a long one. There is a builder who purchased precious urban land to make a hotel in Sector 16, Gurgaon. It bought land by a registered sale deed dated 23.1.2008 from one J.R. Chhabra. There were some constructions on the land prior to purchase. J.R. Chhabra was in litigation before this Court in CWP No. 13086 of 1990 against land acquisition proceedings in defense of his land falling in Khasra No. 1869 as it stood notified under Section 4 & declaration issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in 1988 and 1989 respectively. The Builder, who is the petitioner company herein having purchased the land from J.R. Chhabra pleads innocence of the land acquisition proceedings. It says it did due diligence of the land from the revenue record of village Gurgaon and found no contra indication that the land was un-encumbered in the revenue record; the land in question bore Khewat No. 729/611, Khata No. 1056, Khasra No. 1869 (1-3), measuring 1 Bigha 2 Biswas, situated within the revenue estate of village Gurgaon and falling within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. To make matters worse there is an Ammunition Depot in village Gurgaon falling within the jurisdiction of the Works of Defence Act. The land falls in proximity of the Ammunition Depot, a defense installation established long ago. After having bought the land under acquisition process the petitioner company with a view to construct a hotel submitted building plans for construction of hotel building to the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. Pleads that a scrutiny fee of Rs. 1,23,200/- was deposited on 10.3.2008 with the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon. The petitioner was asked to get the report from the revenue officials regarding status of the property. The Halqa Patwari and Tehsildar on having been approached by the petitioner company reported that the property in dispute was situated outside the limits of the protected radius of the Ammunition Depot, Gurgaon. It was also certified that there were existing constructions in the shape of a house and garage on the said land obviously built by the previous owner. It deserves to be noticed that the request for report of Halqa Patwari was sought by J.R. Chhabra through GPA holder Rajesh Banyal and bears the date 6.2.2008 by Tehsildar with a request to Halqa Patwari to report. The annexure discloses that the subject clearly speaks of the land in question as "acquired/acquisitioned". The petitioner company having bought the land on 23.1.2008 obviously knew of the acquisition since they were acting through J.R. Chhabra or they would be presumed to know of it. Be that as it may, the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon demanded from the petitioner a no objection certificate issued by the District Town Planner, Gurgaon for process of consideration of sanctioning of building plan. The District Town Planner, Enforcement, Gurgaon by memo dated 6.8.2008 wrote to the Deputy Town Planner, Gurgaon as desired by the Director, Urban Local Bodies, Haryana, Chandigarh on behalf of the petitioner company that his office had again re-enquired and found that the place is situated at a distance of 908 meters of the boundary wall from, the Ammunition Depot-54 ASP, Gurgaon; and that the land lay beyond the restricted area of the Ammunition Depot. This memo is P-4. The restriction lies within a radius of 900 meters from the Ammunition Depot what is called the no construction zone.

(2.) The central issue in this case is whether the land in question falls within or outside the 900 meters no construction zone. Two material facts arose after certification and thereafter as far as the parties are concerned. Firstly, the Municipal Corporation after obtaining NOC from the Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana informed the petitioner that arrears of house tax were due against the property. It may be mentioned that J.R. Chhabra was assessed to house tax. The petitioner promptly paid Rs. 5,55,037/- on 30.4.2008 to tape up that loose end. Thereafter, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon demanded a sum of Rs. 83, 74,139/- as development charges from the petitioner company. The petitioner company paid the amount in two installments on 8.6.2010 and 29.11.2011. It appears that after the first tranche of payment building plans were readily sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon by memo dated 14.7.2010. The petitioner pleads that on sanctioning of building plans it demolished existing structures on the land in dispute for raising construction of a hotel building according to the sanctioned plans.

(3.) The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon issued show cause notice to the petitioner company on 14.2.2012 contemplating invoking of Section 256 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 for revocation of sanction of building plans accorded on 14.7.2010. The show cause notice emanates from a communication received from the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon vide his office memo dated 9.2.2012 intimating Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon that the land under Khasra No. 1869 falling in the revenue estate of village Gurgaon and located on the Delhi-Gurgaon road has been notified by Urban Estate Department, Haryana under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on 9.5.1988 and 4.5.1989 respectively. Besides, CWP No. 13086 of 1990 titled J.R. Chhabra v. State of Haryana is pending in which this Court had passed interim orders on 31.10.1990 and 11.12.1990 the main of which reads as follows:-