21 October 2008
Supreme Court
Download

OKHLA ENCLAVE PLOT HOLDERS WEL. ASON. Vs U O I

Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER, , ,
Case number: W.P.(C) No.-000876-000876 / 1996
Diary number: 62174 / 1990
Advocates: SUMITA HAZARIKA Vs P. PARMESWARAN


1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I.As. NOS. 8 and 9 IN WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 876 of 1996

Okhla Enclave Plot Holders Welfare Association ….Petitioners   

Versus

Union of India and Ors. …Respondents

J U D G M E N T

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1. Prayer in these IAs is as follows:

2

“(a) Order a CBI inquiry or appointment of a Commission under the

Chairmanship of a retired Judge of a High Court to inquire into the title of

the lands in question and how licenses came to be issued without  proper

verification of ownership of the same and other issues related to the Colony

as  suggested  by  Municipal  Commissioner,  Faridabad,  in  his  letter

No.MCF/STP/2003/239 dated 25.7.2003.

(b) Appoint Receiver to take over the colony from the Colonizer.

(c) Direct  development  of  the  colony  by  the  Receiver  after

fulfillment of all formalities under the Act in a time bound manner; and  

(d) Pass such other order(s) as this Court may deem fit and proper

in the facts of the case.”  

2. Aforesaid prayers have been made with reference to the orders passed

by this Court on 2.12.1999 and 23.11.2000.  Grievance of the petitioners is

that while they were in correspondence with the authorities, they received

letter  from  the  Additional  Deputy  Commissioner,  Faridabad,  informing

them that  he  had  already  sent  his  report  on  the  enquiry  to  the  Deputy

Commissioner,  Faridabad,  on  22.8.2005.  The  petitioners  also  make  a

grievance  that  neither  they were  heard  nor informed  about  the  so  called

conclusions  of  the  enquiry  for  about  12  months.  They  make  a  further

2

3

grievance that Colonizer has failed to discharge his obligations under the

Haryana Urban Development Act,  1975 (in  short  the ‘Act’) and Haryana

Municipal Corporation Amendment Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the

‘Amendment Act’).  Grievance is also made that the Colonizer has failed to

discharge the obligations as per the licence agreement.  

3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties we direct as follows:

Mr. H.P. Sharma, retired member of Delhi Higher Judicial Services is

appointed  as  Court  Commissioner  to  examine  the  issues  and  submit  his

report to this Court within four months.  The Commissioner shall issue an

advertisement  to  be  published  in  one English  Newspaper  and  one  Hindi

Newspaper with wide circulation notifying that if any person wants to be

heard, he/they may appear as individual or in groups to participate in the

enquiry  to  be  conducted  by  the  Court  Commissioner.  The  cost  of

advertisements shall be shared by the petitioners, State and the Colonizer.

The Court Commissioner shall receive an honorarium of Rs.45,000/-p.m.  to

be shared by the petitioners, the State and the Colonizer.  

3

4

The learned Court Commissioner shall examine and submit report to

this Court on the following aspects within four months:

(i) How much of the land was and is in the ownership of Durga

Builders Pvt. Ltd. and its sister companies in Okhla Enclave Colony, Phase

I  &  II,  Faridabad  in  respect  of  which  licenses  were  granted  by  the

respondents authorities.  

(a)  In 1991-92 when the licenses  to  develop the

colony were granted;

(b) In 1996 when the present writ petitions were

filed; and  

(c) At present.

(ii)  Identification of  the allottees  entitled to  the  plot  with

appropriate  details  setting  out  the  basis  on  which  their

entitlement has been determined;

(iii) Extent  of  the  development  works  already  carried  out

with appropriate details;

(iv) Cost involved in carrying out the remaining development

works with appropriate details;

4

5

(v) Furnishing  account  of  the  money  received  by  the

respondent  authorities  from  Durga  Builders  and  sister

companies;

(vi) Furnishing  account  of  the  amount  received   by Durga

Builders and sister companies from plot holders.  

4. List these matters after four months after submission of report by the

Court Commissioner.    

……………………………J. (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)

………………………..…..J. (C.K. THAKKER)

New Delhi, October 21, 2008

5