PALE RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing order dated 15.7.2004 (Annexure P-13) passed by the Director, Consolidation Department, Haryana, Chandigarh and issuance of a direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to 7 to get encroachments made by the private respondents on the 33 feet road bearing Khasra No. 113, removed. The petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 16687 of 2000 to get the 33 feet wide road demarcated as per Government approved plans. In compliance with order dated 16.12.2000 passed in the said writ petition, the Naib Tehsildar with help of the patwari conducted a demarcation and submitted his report that 19 villagers have encroached upto 3 to 8 feet on land, meant for a road. After demarcation, as no steps were taken for removal of encroachments, the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 6390 of 2001 for a direction to the official respondents to get the encroachments removed. The petition was disposed of vide order dated 28.5.2001 with a direction to remove encroachments within a period of three months. Notice was issued to the encroachers by the Executive Engineer, Provisional Division No. 1, PWD (B & R) Branch, Panipat, to vacate public land. Respondent Nos. 9 to 23 challenged the notice by way of Civil Writ Petition No. 9725 of 2001. The said petition was disposed of with a direction to Tehsildar, Israna, to carry out demarcation within a period of two months and till that time not to demolish the property of the respondents (petitioners in that writ petition). The petitioner filed Contempt Petition No. 1438 of 2002 for non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 6390 of 2001. After issuance of show cause notice in the contempt petition, Naib Tehsildar, Israna, conducted demarcation on 10.7.2003. As per reply filed in the contempt petition, 15 persons had encroached upon pucca road in Khasra No. 113. In the contempt petition, impugned order dated 15.7.2004, passed by the Director, Consolidation Department, Haryana, was produced, according to which encroachments on the land have been regularized. The contempt petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to resort to appropriate remedy against order dated 15.7.2004. The petitioner filed CWP No. 10329 of 2008 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition. Hence the present writ petition.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that consolidation in village Bandh, Tehsil Israna, District, Panipat, took place in the year 1962-63. As per documents prepared during consolidation, the width of the village road, in dispute, is 6 karams. The Director Consolidation has committed a grave illegality in entertaining the petition of private respondents after a delay of 40 years, particularly, in the absence of any explanation, much less satisfactory, for the delay. It is further argued that the Director, Consolidation had no jurisdiction to regularize the encroachments on the road, earmarked during consolidation proceedings.

(3.) Counsel for the contesting respondents submits that the houses of the respondents are in existence prior to consolidation in the village. It is further argued that as the respondents have not encroached upon any part of the road, earmarked on phirni No. 113, the Director, Consolidation, has rightly held in favour of the respondents, while regularizing the existing road. We have heard counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings as well as the impugned order.