Tuesday, December 18, 2012
In Other Courts, New Delhi: Nehru Academy v/s G S Amberhai and Shobha Rani Sharma v/s G S Amberhai...4th July, 2012
IN THE COURT OF Dy. COMMISSIONER & COLLECTOR
Nehru Academy ................................. Appellant
Gaon Sabha Amberhai ................................. Respondent
Shobha Rani Sharma .................................. Appellant
Gaon Sabha Amberhai .................................. Respondent
This shall dispose of the two appeals dated 16/04/2003 filed by the appellants herein above against the orders of the SDM/RA (Vasant Vihar) dated 17/03/2003 issued under section 85 of the DLR Act, 1954 in Case No.402/RA/2001 & and order of ejectment u/s 86A in case No. SDM/VV/32/RA/2002/258-260. Vide the said orders the SDM/RA has dismissed the application u/s 85 and ordered for ejectment of the appellant hereinabove (respondent therein) from the Gaon Sabha land bearing Khasra No. 25/16 (4-16) & 25/17 (4-16) of village Amberhai. Aggrieved by the said order the appellants have preferred the appeals before this Court.
The case of the appellant is that the appellant society is a registered society engaged in educational activities running a school at Vashishta Park, Pankha Road, New Delhi and another school at village Amberhai on the said property on Khasra No. 25/16 (4-10) & 25/17 (0-10) under the name and style of Nehru Academy. It is submitted that the said school became operational on the said land in the year 1988-89 and at that time the land under the occupation of the school was purchased from its erstwhile owner/bhoomidhar for consideration but later on it was found that the land was acquired land in respect of which no purchase/sale could have taken place. The management thus felt itself deceived and intimated the authorities for the same and requested them to allot this piece of land itself on payment. That after a long drawn correspondence, the school was allowed to run on the suit land vide letter no. F.33(101)/P/85/N/1969 dated 12/05/1989 issued by Additional District Magistrate cum Director (P), Delhi Administration.
That the appellant also filed a civil writ petition in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi being the civil writ petition no. 3102/98 for the allotment of the land on regular basis and the said writ petition was also disposed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi giving the directions to the respondents that the case for regular allotment be considered. That the Revenue record pertaining to the said land for the year 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93 reflects that the school was functioning. That the revenue Deptt. filed a petition under section 85 of DLR Act and proceedings remained pending for quite a long time and no effective proceedings ever took place and suddenly and abruptly vide order dated 17/03/2003 the petition was dismissed by a non speaking order and without considering the material available on the record and without considering the revenue record.
The case of the respondent is that the appellant is admitting the encroachment on Gaon Sabha land since long and if he has been duped by the vendor/erstwhile owner/bhoomidhar, he can proceed against him under relevant criminal proceedings.
After hearing the parties and perusing the material on record it has been observed, that the letter No. F.33(101)/P/85/N/1969 dated 12/05/1989 issued by Additional District Magistrate cum Director (P), Delhi Administration referred to by the appellant in his appeal is regarding temporary permission and does not entitle the appellant for continuous encroachment on the said land on permanent basis. Also the said permission of the ADM is prima facie without any authority from the Govt. and therefore it lacks any legal sanctity. This is evident from the order dated 23/4/2002 of the Hon. High Court in case 3102/98 referred to by the appellant in his appeal whereby the Hon. Court has not said anything about the said letter of the ADM and directed the respondent to take decision on the representation of the appellant. Further, contrary to the assertion of the appellant the said order of the Hon. High Court is nowhere a direction for considering his case for regular allotment. Also the contention of the appellant that he was sold some other land but given possession of the suit land and thus duped by the vendor/erstwhile owner/bhoomidhar entitles him for regular allotment of the suit land is untenable because in such a case he has an option to proceed against him under relevant criminal proceedings. In fact allowing allotments on such grounds will be a dangerous precedent which may start a wrong trend. Lastly, the appellant has been encroaching upon the Gaon Sabha land since a very long time and very strangely continue to do so even today using various tactics. This is the situation foreseen by the Hon Supreme Court in the judgement passed in Jagpal Singh & Ors Vs. State of Punjab and Ors in Civil Appeal No. 1132/2011 and SLP (c) No. 3109/2011 and therefore emphasized that the encroachers and illegal occupants on the Gram Sabha land needs to be evicted and the Gram Sabha land needs to be retrieved and restored to the Gram Sabha. Hence the order
In view of the observations made in the judgement the appeal of the appellant hereinabove filed u/s 185 DLR Act, 1954 against the orders of the SDM/RA (Vasant Vihar) dated 17/03/2003 issued u/s 85 of the DLR Act. 1954 in Case No.402/RA/2001 & and order of ejectment u/s 86A in case No. SDM/VV/32/RA/2002/258-260 in respect of the Gaon Sabha land bearing Khasra No. 25/16 (4-16) & 25/17 (4-16) of village Amberhai is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the orders of the SD /RA are upheld and the appeals are dismissed with the directions to the SDM/RA (Vasant Vihar) and BDO (South West) to take further necessary action in a time bound manner.
Given under my hand and seal of this court on this 4th day of July, 2012
Vikas Anand, IAS
Dy. Commissioner & Collector
1. SDM, Najafgarh
2. BDO, South West
3. Both the Parties