 |
|
SC clears Mansa Devi housing complex New Delhi, November 18 Dismissing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the Punjab and Haryana High Court order and a direct writ petition in the apex court on the issue, a Bench of Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal and Mr Justice C.K. Thakker vacated the stay on the project after Haryana Government counsel Ashwani Kumar said that 10.56 acres of forest land acquired “inadvertently” in Saketri village for the project had been excluded from it. Placing on record a detailed affidavit of the Department of Town and Country Planning, Mr Ashwani Kumar told the court that the remaining land was not notified as forest and Rs 60.03 crore had already been disbursed to the land owners in Saketri and Bhainsa-Tibba villages by the state government, which had already received applications from 34,000 persons for the residential plots. The Haryana Government had acquired 950.50 acres, including 10.56 acres of forestland, in these villages in 2000 for the project. “The draw of lots for bookings closed on May 5, 2004, and the stay on the development scheme is resulting in delay and increase in project cost and harassment to the applicants,” the Haryana Government’s affidavit said, pleading the court to lift the stay and clearing the way for the execution of the project. After hour-long arguments, the Bench accepted the plea of the Haryana Government and ruled that petitioner B Singh had not made out a case for allowing his SLP against the Punjab and Haryana High Court order and a direct writ petition filed before the apex court on the issue. The High Court had rejected his PIL challenging the acquisition of land on September 11, 2003. After perusing the affidavit of the Haryana Government stating that it had withdrawn the notification in respect of acquiring that portion of land, which was forestland, the Bench ruled, “We find no ground to interfere in the matter and the petition is dismissed.” The court said with the dismissal of the SLP and the writ petition, the “stay on the project was automatically vacated.” The project was mired in controversy with a series of litigations in the High Court and the Supreme Court through PILs by Mr B Singh, who alleged that the Haryana Government had acquired the notified forestland. He also had contended that by developing a township in the area, the water flow to Chandigarh’s beauty - the Sukhna lake - from the catchment zones would be blocked or diverted, which might pose a threat to the very existence of the water body. However, the Haryana Government counsel stated that there was no basis for any such apprehensions as the Mansa Devi housing complex was being developed by keeping in view every environmental aspect and urbanisation plan for the Chandigarh Periphery Control Area, as provided under the relevant law enacted in this regard. The High Court had also rejected Mr B Singh’s PIL after a categorical statement recorded by the Haryana Government counsel that the Sukhna lake would be fully preserved and no action would be taken by it to cause any harm to the lake, rather every effort would be made to “enhance the cause” of the water body.  |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
