Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 292 (PNJ)

Radhey Shyam v. Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula

2013-03-04

Amol Rattan Singh, Satish Kumar Mittal

body2013
JUDGMENT Mr. Satish Kumar Mittal, J. (Oral):- The petitioner was allotted a free hold plot No. 64, situated in the residential area-II at Ellenabad, District Sirsa, vide allotment letter dated 28.3.1977 (Annexure P-1), by the New Mandi Township Haryana, which was later on merged into the Haryana Urban Development Authority by the Government Notification. Though possession of the said plot was offered to the petitioner in the year 1981 and he cleared all his dues. However, the petitioner could not raise construction on the same, because a high tension electric wire was going near the the said plot. 2. In the affidavit filed by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Sirsa, it has been stated that high tension transmission lines were removed in the month of August, 2003, by Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, which were going near the plot of the petitioner. 3. Though a stand has been taken by the respondents in the written statement that the said high tension wire was going through plot Nos. 49 to 63, but it appears that because of that high tension wire, which was going near plot No.64, the petitioner was justified in not raising construction because of danger to life. The stand taken by the respondents that the said high tension wire was little away from the plot of the petitioner is no ground to accept that there was no danger from the high tension wire going near the plot of the petitioner, otherwise there would have been no need to remove the same. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the petitioner was justified in not raising the construction on the plot before 2003. Thus, he is liable to pay the extension fee on her plot since the year 2003. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will deposit the extension fee as per rules from the year 2003 within a period of two months. 4. Accordingly, we dispose of this petition with a direction that if the petitioner pays extension fee for plot No. 64 from the year 2003 as per rules within a period of two months, the HUDA authorities are directed to sanction the building plan already submitted by the petitioner within a period of two months thereafter and the petitioner may raise construction over the said plot within a period of two years from the date of sanction of the building plan. Disposed of accordingly.