H.B.GARG Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are owners of and reside in houses, in Sector 12-A, Panchkula, pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents not to change the user of the open space/green belt/park situated in front of Houses No.720 to 725, 726 to 733, 676 to 679 and also 768 to 771, and to desist from altering the original plan from an area reserved for open space/green belt/park to an area for construction of houses. The petitioners also pray for issuance of a direction to the respondents to develop the open area situated in front of their houses as a park.

(2.) The petitioners, as already recorded, are owners of houses and reside in Sector 12-A, Panchkula. The petitioners purchased plots from original allottees and constructed houses. The plots were originally allotted in the year 1981 and as per the petitioners, the area, in dispute, was earmarked as a park and though not fully developed, trees were planted on the periphery and a board was fixed to show that the land, in dispute, is reserved as a park. The petitioners pray that as Sector 12-A is a fully developed residential area, this open space reserved for a park may be developed. The petitioners aver that petitioner No.1, addressed a letter dated 21.08.2006 to respondent No.3, pointing out that as the park is being used to dump garbage, cattle belonging to villagers from adjoining villages graze in the park, the land may be developed as a park. An application was filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005, seeking information regarding the status of the park, the authority required to develop the park and the amount spent on development of the park etc. After directions were issued by the State Information Commissioner, the approved lay out plan was provided to the petitioners but to the shock of the petitioners, it was discovered that the respondents have changed the layout plan and transferred the land to the PWD (B&R) for construction of ministers' houses, without inviting objections from the general public, as required by law. A part of the land has now been earmarked for construction of houses for judicial officers.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioners in his passionate and erudite submissions, urges that the respondents admit the fact that as in the original layout plan the land was earmarked for an open space/park, the land cannot be diverted to any other use much less for construction of ministers' houses or for construction of houses for judicial officers, posted at Panchkula. A fully developed park exists at the spot as is apparent from the photographs appended with a miscellaneous application. The residents of Sector 12-A, Panchkula, have spent a lot of money and effort in developing the park. In case, houses are constructed, the park would be destroyed depriving residents of the area of the only open green space available to them thereby converting the entire area into a concrete jungle.