RANDHIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of directions to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to pass an order for stopping misuse of the site auctioned by them in the City Centers in the Urban Estates of Haryana. A further direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 has also been sought directing them to supply the zoning plan of the site i.e. Plot No. 1, District Shopping Centre, Jind, for construction of the hospital by the petitioner. The emphasis in the prayer is directed against respondent No. 4, who was allotted S.C.O. No. 14 and 15, District Shopping Centre, Jind, who is alleged to be misusing the building for hospital/nursing home.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 5.1.2001, the petitioner purchased Plot No. 1, District Shopping Centre, Jind, for a total price of Rs. 11,01,000/-. As per allotment letter bearing No. 65, dated 5.1.2001, the aforementioned site has been reserved for running a Nursing Home. It is claimed that no other plot has been earmarked for running of Nursing Home. The petitioner has paid the full price and possession of the site was handed over to him on 8.7.2003. The petitioner has alleged that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have failed to provide facilities at the site like roads, sewerage and other basic amenities. It is claimed that the petitioner had applied for supplying the zoning plan in order to construct the Nursing Home, which the respondents are deliberately avoiding to supply. He has further alleged that on the one hand no zoning plan is supplied to him whereas on the other hand respondent No. 4 has been permitted to operate the Nursing Home in Show Room No. 14 and 15, District Shopping Centre, Jind, which was allotted to be used for any commercial purpose. The petitioner has placed reliance on the information received under the Right to Information Act, 2005 to urge that building of SCO No. 14 and 15 is being misused for running hospital, which was completed by respondent No. 4 in the year 1998. The official respondents have also issued a notice to him under Section 17(3) of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 (for brevity, 'the 1977 Act') asking respondent No. 4 to stop misuse of the building for hospital purpose. However, no action has been taken.

(3.) IN the separate written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 4 it is claimed that SCO No. 14 and 15, District Shopping Centre, Jind, was allotted for commercial purpose and is being used for that purpose only. He has not violated any of the terms and conditions of the allotment letter nor misused the aforementioned allotment. It is claimed that only in the year 1998, hospital was partly shifted in SCO No. 14 and 15, which include a Consultation Room, Lab, X-Ray Room, Ultra Sound Room and an office and therefore, no condition of the allotment letter is violated nor the above said activity can be termed as obnoxious within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Haryana Urban Development (Disposal of Land and Building) Regulations, 1998. He has also claimed that the resumption order, which was passed by the Estate Officer on 23.11.2007 has been set aside in appeal filed by respondent No. 4 under Section 17(5) of the 1977 Act and the matter has been remanded back vide order dated 27.2.2008 (R-4/1) with the remarks that it may be decided afresh after hearing the legal heirs of the allottee.