ARJUN DEV Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 14.11.2007, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad, cancelling/suspending the resolution dated 21.9.2007, passed by respondent No.3 - Municipal Committee, Hodal (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent Committee'), in exercise of the powers under Section 246 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), as well as the order dated 17.12.2007, whereby the said order has been confirmed by the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon, under Section 249 of the Act.

(2.) In the present case, in an open auction, the petitioner being the highest bidder was allotted one plot, on which the shop in question has been constructed. Undisputedly, subsequently the said allotment was cancelled by the respondent Committee. However, the order of cancellation has not been placed on record by the petitioner for the reasons best known to him. When the respondent Committee tried to dispossess the petitioner from disputed plot/shop being an illegal occupant, he filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the respondent Committee from dispossessing him from the shop in question. The said suit was dismissed by the trial court vide its judgment and decree dated 6.2.2007. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the said judgment and decree has also been dismissed on 29.8.2007. Regular Second Appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgments and decree, passed by the courts below, is pending.

(3.) After dismissal of the above said suit, the respondent Committee filed ejectment proceedings against the petitioner under the Public Premises Act. It is the further case of the petitioner that in the meanwhile, the respondent Committee passed a resolution dated 21.9.2007, whereby tenancy in respect of the shop of the petitioner was renewed on the condition of enhancing rent to Rs. 800/- per month and deposit of Rs.20,000/- as security. The Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad - respondent No.2, in exercise of the power conferred on him under Section 246 of the Act, cancelled/suspended the said resolution on the ground that while passing the said resolution, no discussion was made and the Secretary, Municipal Committee under the influence of the local MLA got passed the said resolution. Even signatures of the Councillors were obtained later on, on the next page. A decision was taken to withdraw the proceedings under the Public Premises Act, which was not in the interest of the Municipal Committee.