Punjab and Haryana High Court fixes six-month deadline to clear encroachments in Mohali
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, September 30
Rapping the “statutory authorities” for being remiss in discharge of statutory duties, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today directed the Mohali MC Commissioner and the GMADA Chief Administrator to remove all illegal and unauthorised encroachments from public paths, footpaths, open spaces, parks, corridors, streets, roads and pavements within the municipal limits of Mohali.
For the purpose of removing the encroachments “strictly in accordance with law after following principle of natural justice”, the Bench of Justice Rajiv Sharma and Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu set a six-month deadline.
The Bench also directed the statutory authorities to initiate disciplinary proceedings within three months against the functionaries in whose tenure the encroachment and unauthorised constructions took place within the municipal limits.
The Bench also made the MC Commissioner and the GMADA Chief Administrator personally responsible to implement and execute the order. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Mohali, was also directed to render all assistance to the statutory authorities.
The directions came on a petition filed by the Area Social Welfare Association against the State of Punjab and other respondents, alleging that a large number of street vendors, including fruit and vegetable sellers, had encroached upon open space in front of the residential houses in Phase XI. It was added that they had also set up temporary kiosks on the footpath without getting a licence from the competent authority.
“The public paths, footpaths, open spaces, parks, corridors, streets and roads cannot be permitted to be encroached upon. It is the duty cast upon the statutory authorities to ensure that no unauthorised construction takes place in public places. The encroachment of public paths, footpaths, open spaces, parks, corridors, streets and roads causes immense hardship to the public at large. The state is the custodian of the public property,” the Bench added.
