Uttarakhand High Court
Mohan Lal vs Mussoorie Dehradun Development ... on 22 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 3228 of 2022 (M/S)
Mohan Lal ......Petitioner
Versus
Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority & Anr.
......Respondents
Present:
Mr. Vikas Bahuguna and Mr. Ravi Bisht, the learned counsel
holding brief of Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for
the petitioner.
Mr. Rahul Consul, the learned counsel for the respondents.
Date of hearing and order: 22.12.2022
Sri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
By filing this writ application, the petitioners have
prayed for the following relief:
"i) Writ order or direction ion the nature of
mandamus directing the respondents to consider the
application/representations of the petitioner for
extension of time in regard to the construction of his
house at Summer Villa Estate in Mussoorie map of
which was sanctioned by the respondents with its file
number 151/M/91 dated 03.03.92.
2. Facts of the case are that, petitioner received a
sanctioned letter from the respondents in the year
1991-92, wherein he was communicated that the map
submitted by him was approved by the Mussoorie
Dehradun Development Authority (hereinafter referred
to as MDDA for brevity) for the purpose of construction
of residential house in Summer Villa Estate. Writ
petition (Civil) No. 8209 and 8821 of 1983 was filed
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that construction is
going on in forest area in Doon Valley in the District of
Dehradun. Some orders were passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court and finally the matters were disposed of
and were transferred to this Court. Thereafter, the
Division Bench of this Court heard the matter and
passed the following order on 06.01.2015 in WPPIL No.
"The matter is about 20 years old, and in our view it
would not be possible for the High Court to consider
each and every case independently and then pass
order on separate applications, What we are
proposing to do is that we are directing the MDDA to
consider the application of each and every individual
independently on merits. If permission or post facto
sanction is required, MDDA will writ to the MOEF, and
if such permission is granted by the MOEF, MDDA will
consider the application of each individual on its own
merits for sanction in the forest area."
3. In that view of the matter, the petitioner could not
carry out further construction of his residential house
and now he prays for extension of the order dated
24.12.1991, sanctioning the map in favour of the
petitioner. On the last date of listing, Mr. Rahul Consul,
the learned counsel appearing for the MDDA was
directed to take instructions. Today, Mr. Rahul Consul
would submit that he has been instructed that as per
the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in
various cases, no construction was carried out over a
piece of land which is recorded as a forest.
4. The petitioner claims that the land on which he
intends to carry out a construction of residential house
is not a part of reserve forest or any other kind of
forest. Since, it cannot be determined whether the land
in question is a forest area or not in a writ petition, the
learned counsel for the MDDA would submit that the
petitioner be directed to file appropriate documents
before the Secretary, MDDA with a prayer to reconsider
the matter and it will be reconsidered on merits.
5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is
disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to appear
before the Secretary, MDDA within a period of ten days,
hence, and produce relevant documents in support of
his claim, as claimed in the writ petition, by annexing
the certified copy of this order and copy of the brief
along with other supporting documents. On such an
event, the Secretary, MDDA shall consider the matter
and in the light of the observations made by the
Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid WPPIL, as
quoted above, shall consider whether permission can be
extended or not, within a period of 30 days from the
date of production of certified copy of this order along
with other relevant documents after affording
reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.)
(Grant certified copies as per rules)
PV
