AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V.K. Bali, J.—Challenge herein is to the notice of demolition Annexure P-4 dated 20.6.2001. It is the positive case of the petitioners, which has not been denied in the written statement filed by the respondents, that the construction made by the petitioners, which was not in accordance with the Rules, was compounded on the petitioners paying the compounding charges and yet the impugned notice was issued for demolition of the construction.
In the reply, which has been filed on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3, it has also been asserted with equal vehemence that some of the construction was made by the petitioners which couid not be compounded, for which action against the officials/officers, who passed the order of charging compounding fee, is contemplated.
Be that as it may, during the course of arguments, it could not be disputed by learned counsel representing the respondents that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, mentioned above, demolition notice Annexure P-4 should be quashed with liberty to the respondents to issue a show cause notice to the petitioners with regard to illegal or unauthorised compounding of the structure which could not be compounded, have a reply of the petitioners and pass an order in accordance with law.
In view of the what has been stated above and in particular as stated by learned counsel representing the respondents, we quash the notice Annexure P-4 with liberty to the respondents-HUDA to issue a proper show cause notice with regard to compounding of the structure which could not be done, have a reply of the petitioners and then pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
Satish Kumar Mittal, J.