Krishan Kumar And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others

Daya Chaudhary, J

Petitioners have approached this Cout by way of filing the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India with the grievance that a Nalla is going through the agricultural land/houses of the petitioners. Said property is ancestral. Petitioners and their other family members are residing there for the last so many years. A kacha rasta is there, which is being used by the petitioners for ingress and egress to both the sides of the land/houses as reflected in Naksha (Annexure P-5). Other than this rasta, there is no other way to go to the houses/agricultural land of the petitioners and with a view to connect both the sides, on two points, a kacha path is there over the Nalla.

Vide notification dated 03.10.2006 issued by respondent No.1 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'), for development and utilization of land for Badshahpur Nalla from Sohna Road upto NH-8 at Gurugram. Objections under Section 5-A of the Act were dispensed with urgency clause under Section 17 of the Act. State Government has started to construct for outer boundary wall to the Nalla and on construction of such wall, the rasta, which is being used by the petitioners, would be blocked. The petitioners made representation to the concerned authorities but no heed was paid to their request. Thereafter, the present writ petition was filed.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners as well as other residents of nearby area would be deprived of their ingress and egress, if rasta, which is being used since long would be blocked by constructing boundary wall as decided by the concerned authorities. The petitioners would not be any access/connectivity with the remaining land, which is situated on the other side of the Nalla. Learned counsel further submits that two paths/rastas are there but only one has been left out while constructing the boundary wall. In case the existing rasta/path is not left out, the petitioners would not be in a position to utilize their land and there would not be any connectivity with the land on the other side of the Nalla. Learned counsel also submits that under the similar circumstances/situation, respondents have given access to one Vipul World, Sector-48, F Block, Gurugram over the same Nalla as reflected in Naksha (Annexure P-5). Same claim was there in CWP No.4007 of 2007, which was disposed of with a direction that rasta/passage be restored to the petitioners to facilitate their ingress and egress to the land in dispute.

Separate reply on behalf of respondents No.3 and 5 has been filed, which is on record.

Learned State counsel submits that the land of the petitioners was acquired for public purpose i.e. for development and utilization of the land for Badshahpur Nalla, Phase-1 from Sohna Road upto NH-8 at Gurugram. Possession thereof was also taken on 10.09.2007 by the Estate Officer-II, HSVP, Gurugram. Learned State counsel has not disputed this fact that there is no other rasta to reach to the land of the petitioners but submits that work of construction of boundary wall has almost been completed and two stretched of rasta marked AB and CD in the site plan (Annexure R-1) have been left out as approved by the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana. Learned State counsel also submits that one revenue rasta marked as EF is already existing on the site and one other two karam wide access marked as GH, having connectivity with revenue rasta EF, is also existing on the site.

Heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties and we have also perused the documents available on the file.

Petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondent-authorities to the extent that in case, the outer wall of Nalla is constructed, the rasta, which is already in existence, would be blocked and for reaching to the land of the petitioners situated in Killa No.20/3, there will not be any other path. The petitioners are having land on both sides of the Nalla and in case, the boundary wall is constructed, the land situated on other side of the Nalla cannot be utilized. One rasta has already been left out but the second rasta for reaching to the land situated in Killa No.20/3 would be blocked.

By considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and also the fact that one path is there for connectivity from one side to other but on the other side, the rasta would be blocked, which will deprive the petitioners and other persons to utilize their land, the present writ petition is allowed with a direction to respondent No.4 to restore the existing rasta (passage) by constructing over bridge over the Nalla while raising outer boundary wall for smooth ingress and egress of the petitioners and other residents.