MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE BHIWANI Vs. MUNSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) L. P. As Nos. 394, 395, 396 and 442 of 1983 are being disposed of by a common judgment as common question of law and fact is involved therein.

(2.) THE only question surviving for consideration, as directed by the apex Court relates to the constitutional validity of S. 44a of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922, as enforced in Haryana (for short "the Act") and the notifications issued from time to time under the proviso to the said section granting extension of the period for the completion of the scheme.

(3.) THE relevant facts for appreciation of the question involved briefly are that vide notification No. 7111-3ci-76/22899 dated July 7, 1976, the Governor of Haryana in exercise of power under S. 41 (1) of the Act sanctioned Development Scheme No. 23 prepared by the Bhiwani Improvement Trust. Bhiwani, under S. 24 read with sub-sec. (2) of S. 28 of the said Act. As enjoined by sub-sec. (1) of S. 42 of the Act, the scheme was also notified. The scheme was not executed within a period of five years from the date of issue of notification under sub-sec. (1) of S. 42 of the Act. Vide Notification No. 14/ 36/ 3ci-80 dated October 13, 1980, the Governor of Haryana extended the period for the execution of the scheme for a period of three years from July 7, 1981 to July 6, 1986 (1984? ).