AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
In the present writ petition, the following prayers have been made in the headnote: -
“Civil Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of Certiorari seeking setting aside/ quashing of the Order bearing memo no. 389473 dated 10.12.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by respondent No. 2 under Section 18(1)(b) of HSVP Act, 1977, whereby allegations of un-authorized/illegal construction on the HSVP land in Sector-2, Bahadurgarh have been levelled against the petitioner and the petitioner has been illegally and arbitrarily directed to vacate the HSVP land and demolish the alleged unauthorised/ illegal construction raised within seven days of issue of the letter dated 10.12.2025 (Annexure P-1), which is perverse, illegal and against the judgment dated 17.08.2001 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide bunch of SLP's, main case titled 'Sube Singh versus State of Haryana and Others, Civil Appeal No. 5516 of 2001 (Arising out of SLP No.585 of 1999)', whereby the land having structures on them, belonging to many people including the petitioners was ordered to be excluded from acquisition except any land which is required for construction of a road or hospital and in pursuance of judgment passed in SLP No. 585 of 1999, the land of the petitioners in the name of predecessor in interest (Rajpal) was released vide communication dated 08.01.2003 (Annexure P-8) and communicated vide letter memo no. 1119, 28.02.2003 (Annexure P-9). AND Further, praying for setting aside/quashing of the show cause notice dated 10.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) bearing Memo no. 46039, issued by Respondent No. 2 i.e. Estate Officer under Section 18(1)
(b)of Haryana Shehri Vikas Parishad Act, 1977, to unknown persons whereby allegations of un-authorized occupation of the Haryana Shehri Vikas Parishad land in Sector-2, Bahadurgarh have been levelled against the petitioners, and the petitioners have been asked to show cause as to why the petitioners should not be evicted from the land question. AND Further praying for stay of the order dated 10.12.2025 (Annexure P-1) as well as the show cause notice dated 10.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) issued by respondent no.2, alleging authorised/illegal construction on the land in the question and wrongly directing the petitioners to vacate the said property, despite the fact that the petitioners are in rightful ownership and possession of the property in question. AND/OR Issue any other writ/order/direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice”
On 19.03.2026, the Co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-
“Present: Mr. R.S.Randhawa, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Karanyog Riar, Advocate and Mr. Swayam Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Addl.A.G., Haryana. *** Counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioners’ land was released from acquisition vide order dated 08.01.2003 (Annexure P-8) in compliance of the directions passed by the Supreme Court on 17.08.2001 (Annexure P-7). Counsel states that decision was communicated to the petitioners vide communication dated 28.02.2003 (Annexure P-9) and by letter dated 28.02.2009 (Annexure P-10), petitioners were asked to deposit the development charges, which was done. He states that by virtue of impugned notices (Annexures P-1 and P-2) issued under Section 18 (1) (b) of the HSVP Act, 1977, petitioners were asked to show cause and subsequently, ordered to vacate the land and demolish the un-authorized construction. It is his assertion that once the land stood released from acquisition, impugned notices could not have been issued moreso, without mentioning the particulars of the land. Advance copy of the petition has been served upon counsel for HSVP, who requests for short accommodation to get instructions. List on 24.03.2026. In the meanwhile, status quo shall be maintained over the property till the next date of hearing. March 19, 2026”
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that apart from the other issues, even a perusal of the show cause notice dated 10.02.2025 (Anneuxsre P-2) would show that the same has been addressed to unknown persons and there is no detail as to what land the said unknown persons are stated to be in unauthorized occupation of. It is further submitted that even the order dated 10.12.2025 is as vague as the show cause notice and the same has also been addressed to unknown persons. It is argued that in the garb of the said show cause notice and the order, the demolition of the shop of the petitioners has been undertaken. It is submitted that it is a matter of settled law that the principle of natural justice should be complied with and effective opportunity should be given to the petitioners to file reply to the show cause notice, which effective opportunity has not been given in the present case, on account of the show cause noticed being vague.
Learned counsel for the respondents-State has submitted that in the status report, they have referred to the demarcation report and have specifically stated that the land in question was coming in the greenbelt and was also a part of the road, but he could not deny the fact that the show cause notice has been issued to unknown persons which fact is also apparent from a perusal of Annexures P-1 and P-2. It is further submitted that in the said circumstances, in case the said order and show cause notice are to be set aside, then, liberty be also granted to the respondents-State to issue a fresh show cause notice in accordance with law after giving specific details of the demarcation report as well as the land which as per the respondents has been illegally occupied by the petitioners and on which illegal construction has been made by the petitioners.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after the issuance of a fresh show cause notice, liberty be granted to the petitioners to file a reply to the said show cause notice, giving the details of their defence and the final order be passed after considering the said reply and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/duly authorized representatives of the petitioners.
Keeping in view the above-said facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of the petitioners as well as the respondents-State, the present writ petition is partly allowed and the show cause notice dated 10.02.2025 as well as the order dated 10.12.2025, which are absolutely vague, are set aside, with the following observations/directions: -
It would be open to the respondents-State to issue a fresh show cause notice giving the details of the land which as per them has been illegally occupied or on which illegal construction has been made by the petitioners and which as per their case is not a part of the released land.
The petitioners would be given two weeks time to file a reply to the said show cause notice.
It is made clear that in case any such reply is filed within the aforesaid period, then, the respondent-authorities would pass a final order after considering the said reply and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/duly authorized representatives of the petitioners.
It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits of the case and it would be open to all the parties concerned to raise all pleas as available in law and the competent authority would pass the order independently, in accordance with law.