M A I N   N E W S

Anandgarh panel files caveat
Nishikant Dwivedi

Chandigarh, April 4
The Anandgarh Hatao Sanjhi Sangharsh Committee has filed a caveat before the Supreme Court apprehending that the Punjab Government might move the court against the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgement of March 28 in which, it had quashed the notification for the proposed township of Anandgarh located in the north west of Chandigarh.

Speaking to The Tribune, Mr Jasbir Singh Dhaliwal, General Secretary of the committee, said the caveat was filed yesterday by the petitioners. This means that the SC would have to hear the counsel of the committee if the Punjab Government challenges the HC judgement.

Meanwhile, sources in the Punjab Government said the government wanted to do some homework before moving the apex court. The Punjab Chief Minister, Mr Parkash Singh Badal, had reportedly gone on records that the government would file a Special Leave Petition in the SC. The government was exploring the options before moving the SC.

When contacted the Advocate General of Punjab, Mr H S Mattewal, said the government had not received any notice of the said caveat. Mr Mattewal said, “The attested copy of the HC judgement is still awaited and the government would file the SLP within the due time”.

The Advocate General said the High Court had not termed the project ‘‘as illegal’’ but it merely quashed the notification on the procedural grounds. He maintained that the government would first examine the judgement and then move the SC. He said, ‘‘It is the right of the government to challenge the orders and it will do it”. When asked that the court had also pointed about the lack of funds with the government for paying compensation, Mr Mattewal said, “A special authority was set for the project which has the right to borrow or raise funds’’.

According to the sources in the Punjab Government, one of the ground on which the SLP will be based is that there are two distinct approaches to urban development as envisaged in the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995. One by the way of acquisition of land and undertaking development and disposal of land for which sufficient legislative framework has been provided under Chapter V and VI of the Act.. The second, by way of planning areas and town development schemes without actually acquiring the land.

The sources have it that the government in the case Anandgarh was following the approach as dictated by Chapter V and VI of the 1995 Act, which was akin to provisions of the Punjab Urban Estates (Development and Regulation) Act, 1964, instead of provisions of Chapter VIII, IX, and X and others relating to the second approach of planning areas.

The sources maintain that a State Regional and Town Planning and Development Board are only applicable where regional plans or master plans are to be prepared. A Punjab official claimed, “The board is not required where the government owns the land or the land is to be acquired by the government”. The government is also likely to quote in the SLP the instance of existing development in Chandigarh, SAS Nagar and Panchkula.