SOCIAL WELFARE ASSOCIATE Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SOCIAL Welfare Association, S. C. F. No. 46, Near Bus Stand, Pehowa, through its General Secretary Amar Chand, and Ashwani Kumar son of Kulwant Rai, petitioners, have filed the present writ petition earlier against respondents Nos. 1 to 4, but later on respondents Nos. 5 to 7 were added, and the prayer contained in the writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for the issuance of the writ of mandamus directing the official respondents (i. e. respondents Nos. 1 to 4) to develop and maintain the space as green belt in the Shopping Complex No. 1 and 2, and also provide other amenities as laid down in the enclosed map (P4) and a further direction be issued to respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to prevent the encroachment of the space meant for these amenities by the illegal khokhawalas, who have constructed their khokhas in an illegal manner over the area earmarked for green belt in the scheme.

(2.) THE case set up by the petitioners is the plot/house owners/s. C. F. owners of Shopping Complex No. 1 and 2, New Mandi Township, Pehowa, have formed an association known as Social Welfare Association with its office in S. C. F. No. 46, Near Bus Stand, Pehowa. The petitioner-Association vide its resolution dated 31. 7. 1990 has decided to file the present writ petition and has authorised its General Secretary Shri Amar Chand to file the same. Petitioner No. 2 is the owner of S. C. F. No. 44, which is located in the same area and he is filing the present writ petition in his individual capacity, being a plot holder.

(3.) PETITIONER No. 1 made a representation on 5. 12. 1990 to respondent No. 1 bringing to its notice the inaction on the part of the Department by not providing the necessary amenities. In this letter (Annexure P5) it was specifically brought to the notice of the authorities about the pitiable condition of the Complex. It was also brought to the notice of the authorities that in Shopping Complex No. 2 neither electricity nor water supply, nor proper drainage of water had been provided. The illegal encroachment by the Khokhawalas and the Chara Mandi people has not been removed in spite of repeated requests in respect therewith. In spite of the representation given to respondent No. 1 personally, and in spite of the fact that assurance was given, nothing was done. Reminders were given to respondent No. 1. On the reminders some official communication took place between respondents Nos. 1 an 2 and some action was also taken by the respondents and a few amenities were provided, but the development of Green Belt/parking Places was not done at all. In fact, slowly and with the passage of time the place meant for green belt and the parking area was encroached by the illegal khokhawalas and it became a den of anti-social elements, with the active/passive connivance of the respondent-authorities. The matter was brought to the notice of respondent No. 2 about the nuisance created by the khokhawalas and the trespassers. The authorities were requested to develop this area as green belt, but no action was taken in spite of the letters of request, copies of which have been annexed with the writ petition. In para No. 12 of the writ petition it has been specifically averred by the petitioners that the respondents have not provided the necessary amenities, nor they have developed the space meant for development as green belt in spite of numerous deputations and several written requests; rather the authorities are conniving with the khokhawals, by putting the space for some alternative use. In para No. 13 of the writ petition a plea has also been taken that the act of respondent No. 2 would encourage in ecological and environmental imbalances and respondent No. 1 is encouraging the illegal encroachment on the open space, which can result in traffic hazards. The indecent acts on the part of the khokhawalas make it difficult for the young girls and the house-wives to pass through the streets.