RAM SARUP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Letters Patent Appeal arising out of the judgement dated 5/01/1984 by the learned single Judge in writ petition No. 3694 of 1981 (reported in 1984 Pun LJ 441), filed be Ram Sarup, Partner of Messra Singla Rice and General Mills, Thanesar, district Kurukshetra, seeking quashing of the Notification dated 26/06/1980 under S. 4(1)(b) of the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and the complaint filed in pursuance thereof.

(2.) Briefly the facts giving rise to the present Appeal are as follows:- There is a single Rice and General Mills situated in Thanesar, district Kurukshetra. Ram Sarup, petitioner, is a Partner of the same. This Mill was constructed in the year 1972 and is situated within the municipal limits of Kuruk-shetra. The Mills created a sister concern by the name of 'Singla Industries' and it proposed to construct three rooms for the same as an extension of the building to the Mills. These rooms were sought to be constructed on Salarpur Road, Thanesar. The area in which three rooms were sought to be constructed had already been declared as a controlled area vide the Notification issued by the Haryana Government on 26/06/1980, which was published on 29/07/1980 under the Act. On 25/08/1980, an application was submitted for sanction of the said constructions and it has been alleged that on 16/09/1980, the Municipal Engineer certified that there was no objection to the installation of Singla Industries on Salarpur Road. When the officers of the District Town Planner office visited the site in question on 26/09/1980, it was reported by them that Ram Sarup was constructing the three rooms which was against the Notification dated 26/06/1980. He was consequently issued a show-cause notice dated 4-11-1980 under registered cover to stop further construction and another notice was issued to restore the land to its original shape. The petitioner Ram Sarup however, continued the unauthorised constructions and consequently thereafter, the District Town Planner, Kurukshetra filed a complaint under S. 12(1)(b) of the Act in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kurukshetra. The petitioner has consequently challenged the Notification issued under S. 4 of the Act as well as the complaint filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. The learned single Judge before whom the writ petition came up for hearing upheld the Notification under S. 4 of the Act and consequently dismissed the petition on 5/01/1984. This judgement of the learned single Judge is subject to challenge in the present appeal.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the Appellant Shri R. S. Mittal, Senior Advocate and Shri Jagdev Sharma, Additional Advocate General for the State of Haryana.