National Green Tribunal
Parul Bawa Advocate vs State Of Haryana on 14 September, 2022
Item No.01 (Court No. 2)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No.69/2022
Parul Bawa ...Applicant
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
Date of hearing: 14.09.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: None.
Respondents: Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr. Advocate alongwith Mr. Saurabh
Rajpal, Advocate, for respondent no. 1-M/s SVC
Venture and Lahri Builder.
Ms. Sonali Malhotra, Advocate for respondent no. 2-
MoEF&CC.
Mr. Anil Grover, Sr. AAG alongwith Mr. Rahul Khurana,
Advocate for respondent no. 3,4 and 5-HSPCB, Director,
Town and Country Planning and District Magistrate,
Faridabad.
Mr. Vikram Singh, Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad
through VC.
Mr. Lalit Bazad, DTP (HQ), Department of Town & Country
Planning, Ms. Renuka Singh, DTP, Faridabad, Department
of Town & Country Planning and Mr. Raj Kumar, DCF,
Faridabad, Department of Forest, Haryana in person.
Application is registered based on complaint received by Post.
ORDER
1. Grievance in the application by Advocate Parul Bawa is regarding unauthorized cutting of 50-60 years old trees in the forest land comprised in Khasra no. 370 near Green Field Colony, Village Sarai Khawaja, Faridabad, Haryana falling under Arawali Hills by M/S SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders. It is submitted that earlier the builders had cut the trees in the forest. With the intervention of the local residents, FIR bearing no. 24/2020 O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -2- was registered against them. However taking advantage of the pandemic, they have cut the trees in the forest adversely affecting the environment, residents of nearby area as well as the animals in the forest. It is further submitted that as per order dated 05.03.2019 passed in O.A. No. 407/2017 titled as M/s Monika Industries Vs. Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board this Tribunal has declared the area in question as 'Deemed Forest Area' and therefore no construction can be carried out by the Project Proponent-M/s SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders.
2. Vide order dated 02.02.2022, this Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee comprising of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (HoFF), State of Haryana and the District Magistrate-Faridabad and directed the same to submit factual and action taken report within three months. The relevant part of the order reads as under:-
"Having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, it appears necessary to ascertain the factual position in the matter through a joint Committee of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (HoFF), State of Haryana and the District Magistrate-Faridabad.
The District Magistrate, Faridabad will be the Nodal agency for coordination and compliance. The joint Committee may meet within four weeks and undertake site visit and look into the grievance of the applicant. Factual and action taken report may be furnished within three months by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF...."
3. In compliance thereof, the District Magistrate, Faridabad submitted report dated 28.04.2022 vide E-mail dated 28.04.2022. The relevant part of the report is reproduced as under:-
"Action taken report by way of affidavit of Jitender Yadav, IAS, District Mgistrate, Faridabad in compliance of order dated 02.02.2022.
X X X X X X
3. That in compliance of the above order of the Hon'ble Tribunal a Committee comprising SDM (Badkhal), Range Forest Officer, Faridabad and ATP (P), Faridabad was constituted to visit the O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -3- site in question to verify the allegations made in the complaint to visit the site in question to verify the allegations made in the complaint vide Memo No. LFA/2022/131-33 dated 21.02.22. A copy of the said letter dated 21.02.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure - R/1.
4. That it is submitted that SDM (Badkhal) in its report dated 29.03.2020 stated as follow:
a. SDM (Badkhal), Range Forest Officer and ATP(P) along with the revenue officials jointly visited the spot on 11.03.2022. Reports of Tehsildar, Badkhal and Range Forest Officer were submitted to SDM Badkhal who forwarded the reports to the deponent. However, as the report of the Range Forest Officer was not found lucid so a coherent report was sought from him.
b. It was reported by Tehsildar, Badkhal that as per revenue record ownership of M/S SVC & Lahari partner Mustil No.70//6(8-0), 7/2(7-9), 8/2(7-9), 9/1(1-13), 12/2(1-13), 13(8-0), 14(8-0), 15(8-0), 17/2,(7-10), 18(8-0),19/1 (1-
13) total raqba 67K-7M, vill. Sarai Khwaja, Tehsil Badkhal, District Faridabad vests with S. Lakshman Rao s/o Shreedhar & Shri Niwas Rai s/o Venkateshwar Rao.
c. Range Forest Officer (Regional), Faridabad has reported that on spot inspection of M/S SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders situated at Green Field it was found that no new trees have been cut at the spot. At the site in question an old road and some structures are there. That earlier an ayurvedic factory used to run there. Section 4 and Section 5 of the PLPA, 1900 is not applicable at the site in question. That the said spot neither falls under reserved forest nor under protected forest. General Section 4 of the PLPA, 1900 is applicable there according to which cutting of any kind of trees is prohibited unless permission from Divisional Forest Officer, Faridabad is obtained. That the site in question has been notified as Gair-Mumkin Pahar. That this company had cut trees on dated 13.01.2020 without seeking permission from the competent authority consequently Forest Department got Forest Offence Report No.100/0452 dated 13.01.2020 registered against it whose prosecution case was also filed in the Hon'ble Environment Court as well. That for the said illegal cutting activity F.I.R. No.24/2020 has also been lodged by the department in police station, Surajkund. A list of standing trees on the spot has also been prepared and these trees are marked as well. Marking list of such trees on the site in question is enclosed. A copy of the said report 298.03.2022 & 25.04.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure-R2 and R3 respectively.
5. That it is humbly submitted that on joint inspection of the site in question it is found that no new trees have been cut from O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -4- the site. The site in question is notified as Gair Mumkin Pahar and all the standing trees have been marked and listed."
4. Subsequently, the District Magistrate, Faridabad submitted supplementary report dated 05.08.2022 vide email dated 05.08.2022. The relevant part of the report is reproduced as under:
"Supplementary Action taken report of Jitender Yadav, IAS, District Magistrate, Faridabad in compliance of Order dated 02.02.2022.
X X X X X X
3. That it is submitted that a committee constituting SDM (Badkhal), Range Forest Officer, Faridabad and ATP(P), Faridabad was constituted to visit the site in question to verify the allegations made in the complaint dated 21.02.2022.
4. SDM (Badhal) in its report dated 29.03.2022 & Range Forest Officer(Regional) vide its report dated 25.04.2022 had stated as flow:
a. SDM (Badkhal), Range Forest Officer and ATP(P) alongwith the revenue officials jointly visited the spot on I 1,03,2022, Reports of Tehsildar, Badkhal and Range Forest Officer were submitted to SDM Badkhal who forwarded the reports to the deponent. It was reported by Tehsildar, Badkhal that as per revenue record ownership of M/s SVC & Lahari partner Mustil No.70//6(8-0), 7/2(7-9), 8/2(7-9), 9/1(1-13), 12/2(1-13), 13(8-
0),14(8-0),15(8-0), 17/2(7-10),18(8-0),19/1(1-13) total raqba 67K-7M, vill. Sarai Khwaja, Tehsil Badkhal, District Faridabad vests with S. Lakshman Rao s/o Shreedhar & Shri Niwas Rai s/o Venkateshwar rao, b. Range Forest Officer (Regional), Faridabad has reported that on spot inspection of M/s SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders situated at Green Field it was found that no new trees have been cut at the spot. At the site in question an old road and some structures are there. That earlier an Ayurvedic Factory used to run there. Section 4 and Section 5 of the PLPA, 1900 is not applicable at the site in question. The said spot neither falls under reserved forest nor under protected forest.
General Section 4 of the PLPA, 1900 is applicable there according to which cutting of any kind of trees is prohibited unless permission from Divisional Forest Officer, Faridabad is obtained. That the site in question has been notified as Gair Mumkin Pahar. That this company had cut trees on dated 13.01.2020 without seeking permission from the competent authority consequently Forest Department got Forest Offence Report No.100/0452 dated 13.01.2020 registered against it O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -5- whose prosecution case was also filed in the Hon'ble Environment Court as well. That for the said illegal cutting activity F.I.R. No.24/2020 has also been lodged by the Department in Police Station, Surajkund. A list of standing trees on the spot has also been prepared and these trees are marked as well. Marking list of such trees on the site in question is enclosed. Copies of the said reports dated 29.03.2022 and 25.04.2022 are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-R/1 & ANNEXURE-R/2 respectively.
5. However, the report submitted was not coherent and comprehensive, therefore, additional factual reports were sought from the District Town Planner, Faridabad (Planning) and Deputy Conservator of Forest, Faridabad.
6. That District Town Planner, Faridabad (Planning) vide Memo No. 4269 dated 23.06.2020 submitted a report regarding the issuance of LOI for developing residential plotted colony on the said land inspite of being under Natural Conservation Zone summarized as follow:
i. A brief comprehension of the overall concept of NCZ introduced in the Regional plan -- 2021AD (hereinafter referred to as RP-2021), notified in the year 2005 and the facts relating to evolution of concept of NCZ, its components and the subsequent efforts/deliberations held for its identifications on ground were spelled out in the said report.
ii. It was further stated that as per the RP-2021, the impugned site falls under NCZ. However, as per the report of District Level Sub Committee, the same has not been included in the area under NCZ in District Faridabad as the same does not fall under any of the aforementioned categories prescribed as NCZ in the RP-2021.
iii. With respect to license issued it was intimated that the License no. 50 of 2022 issued vide DTCP memo no. 11246 dated 25.04.2022 has been granted for area measuring 5.00625 (impugned Land) with the following condition imposed on the developer:
"That the final decision of State Level Committee on recommendation of District Level Committee regarding inclusion / exclusion of applied land from NCZ category shall be binding upon you and you shall abide by the same."
A copy of the said report dated 23.06.2022 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-R/3.
7. That vide Memo No. 550 dated 04.08.2022, Dy. Conservator of Forests, Faridabad reported as follow :-
O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -6- i. The area under consideration in OA No.69/2022 is recorded as Gair Mumkin Pahar in revenue estate of Sarai Khawaja and is closed under General Section 4 of PLPA where felling of trees require prior permission of DFO. As per enumeration undertaken there are 153 trees of various species standing on the said land.
ii. In O.A No. 407 of 2017, the Hon'ble NGT vide order dated 05-03-2019 has declared the land under consideration in said matter as a deemed forest. However, this order of the Hon'ble NGT has been challenged in theHon'ble Supreme Court in C.A. No.4977 of 2019 in the matter of M/s Ajay Enterprises Pvt Ltd V/s Lt. Col. (Retd.) Sarvadaman Oberoi and others.
iii. It is further submitted that Hon'ble Supreme court in the said matter vide its order dated 08.04.2022 directed as under:-
"List these matters after the pronouncement of judgment in SLP (C) No. 10294 of 2013 and connected cases in the following week."
The copy of the said Report dated 04.08.2022 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/4.
8. That it is worthwhile to mention here that SLP (C) No. 10294 of 2013 mentioned in order dated 08.04.2022 (referred in above Para No.7(iii)) is actually Civil Appeal (CA) No.10294 of 2013. Judgment in the said matter has been pronounced on 21.07.2022.
The C.A. No.4977 of 2019 in the matter of M/s Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd V/s Lt. Col. (Retd.) Sarvadaman Oberoi is pending alongwith CA No.5067 of 2019 (State of Haryana V/s Lt. Col. (Retd.) Sarvadaman Oberoi) before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Both the appeals have been filed against order dated 5.3.2019 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A No. 407 of 2017. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide interim order dated 12.7.2019, has directed that there shall be no cancellation of any permission granted in the meanwhile. Copy of order dated 12.7.2019 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/5. "
5. Mr. Rahul Kurana, Advocate, who appeared for the District Magistrate and Divisional Forest Officer, Faridabad on 08.08.2022, filed a copy of order dated 06.07.2022 passed by The Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana whereby license no. 50/2022 dated 02.04.2022 granted to M/s SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders for developing affordable residential plotted colony under Deen Dayal Awas Yojna (DDAY) Policy-2016 on the land in O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -7- question was suspended till the finalization of the issue of NCZ in District Faridabad.
6. Vide order dated 08.08.2022, notices were ordered to be issued to the Project Proponent- M/s SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders, Regional Office of MoEF & CC, State PCB, Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana and District Magistrate, Faridabad and personal appearance of District Magistrate, Faridabad, Divisional Forest Officer, Faridabad and concerned Senior Officer from the office of Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana dealing with the matter and District Town Planner, Faridabad was also ordered.
7. As per office report, notices on the above said respondents have been duly served.
8. Reply dated 09.09.2022 has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 1- M/S SVC Ventures and Lahari Builders vide E-mail dated 12.09.2022.
Affidavit dated 13.09.2022 sworn by the Director General, Town and Country Planning has been filed vide email dated 13.09.2022.
9. Further Action Taken Report by way of Affidavit dated 06.09.2022 of District Magistrate, Faridabad has also been filed vide email dated 13.09.2022. The relevant part of the report is reproduced as under:
" 4. That it is submitted that in furtherance of aforementioned order of the Hon'ble Tribunal, on 16.08.2022, the then District Magistrate visited the site in question along with District Town Planner- Faridabad, District Forest Officer-Faridabad and the Sub Divisional Magistrate (Badkhal) with Chowki Incharge, Green Field Colony Faridabad and no activity regarding the development works was observed.
5. Detailed reports were sought from District Town Planner, Faridabad (Planning) and Deputy Conservator of Forest with respect to the observations made in the aforementioned Order dated 08.08.2022 by this Hon'ble Tribunal. That vide Memo No. 5432 dated 22.08.2022 and Memo No. 605 dated 22.08.2022 respectively (Copy enclosed as Annexure R/1 and R/2), DTP (Planning) and DFO reported as follow:
O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -8- i. On 16.08.2022, a joint visit has been conducted with the then Deputy Commissioner (Faridabad), District Forest Officer (Faridabad) and the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Badkhal along with Chowki Incharge, Green Field Colony, Faridabad and no activity regarding work has been observed.
ii. The impugned land mentioned in the subjected complaint is bearing khasra no. 70-M/s SVC Venture Et Lahari Builders. It is informed that out of the total impugned land, license bearing no. 50 of 2022 dated 22.04.2022 was granted on land bearing khasra no. 70// 8/2 (3-12), 9/1 (1-13), 12/2 (1-13), 13 (8-0), 14 (8 0), 17/2 (7-10), 18 (8-0), 19/1 (1-13), measuring 5.00625 acres in Village Sarai Khawaja to M/s SVC Et Lahari. As per the joint inspection conducted, the entire area including the licensed land has been bounded by approx 6 ft. high boundary wall and partly with sheet fencing. The license granted land has been demarcated with burji and toe wall as per the approved area and Layout Plan. The sewer network has been laid partly in the license granted land (approx 418 Rmt. Stretch). The road network has been demarcated, however, no earth filling and WBM (Water Bound Macadam) has been done. No construction has been raised on any of the license granted demarcated site. No development activity has been observed in the area beyond the license granted land except a site office measuring approx 165.85 Sqm. has been raised. The site photographs depicting the said status on the layout plan of license granted colony and the satellite imagery of impugned land with key location of respective photographs are enclosed herewith(copy enclosed as Annexure R/3).
iii. The area under consideration in OA No. 69/2022 is recorded as GairMumkinPahar in revenue estate of Sarai khawaja and closed under Section 4 a 5 PLPA where felling of trees require prior permission of DFO.
The land under consideration in O.A. No. 407 of 2017, the Hon'ble NGT vide their Order dated 05.03.2019 has declared the land under consideration as a deemed forest. However, this order of the Hon'ble NGT has been challenged in the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4977/2019 in the matter of M/s Ajay Enterprise Private Limits vs. Lt. Col(retd.) Sarvodaman Oberoi and others.
It is further submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said matter vide its Order dated 08.04.2022 directed as under:-
"List these matters after the pronouncement of judgment in SLP NO. 10294 of 2013 and connected cases in the following week."
The judgment in the connected relevant case has been pronounced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and now the matter of M/s Ajay Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. will be heard and decided. Furthermore, as per the report submitted by Dy. Conservator of Forest, at present there is no approved definition of deemed forest.
O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -9- iv. Regarding the creation of third party rights, it is informed that the information regarding the same was sought from Tehsildar, Badhkhal and the project proponent/licensee vide this office memo no. 5280-84 dated 09.08.2022. As per the information received vide Tehsildar memo no. 1103 dated 16.08.2022, the impugned land is under the ownership of project proponent i.e. M/s SVC EtLahari and no further registration of any sale deed has been executed in the said land. As per the report submitted by the project proponent vide letter received on 18.08.2022, no third party rights have been informed to be created by said licensee in the earlier license granted project area (Copy enclosed as Annexure R/4). v. The needful instructions have been given to the project proponent to not carry out any further development works and to not create any third party rights in the project vide this office Endst. No. 5284 Dated 09.08.2022. The site is being got regularly inspected and as per site report, no development activity has been reported (Copy enclosed as Annexure R/5). vi. For alleged felling of trees, Forest Offence Report(FOR) No. 0452/100 dated 13.01.2022 has been registered and case has been filed beforeSpecial Environment Court, Faridabad and FIR No. 24/2020 has been registered. With respect to the FOR No. 0452/100, it is reported by Dy. Conservator Forest, Faridabad vide Memo No. 807 dated 12.09.2022 that total no. of trees found cut on the spot are as follow:-
a. 448 -Undersize Miscellaneous Species b. 01 - Safeda c. 43 - Miscellaneous Species.
As prescribed in report total value and compensation amount of these trees are Rs. 1,85,438/-.
It is intimated by SHO, PS-Surajkund, Faridabad vide letter dated 07.09.2022 against FIR No. 24/2020, case no. 42/2021 is pending in the Hon'ble SPL Environment Court Faridabad and is listed on 03.10.2022 for supplying copy of challan as well as consideration on charge"
Copies of the said reports dated 12.09.2022 dt dated 07.09.2022 enclosed as Annexure R/6 Et Annexure R/7.
6. That the deponent also visited the impugned land personally on 05.09.2022 with DTP(Planning), Deputy Conservator of Forest, SDM (Badkhal) and other revenue officials and found the status of the impugned site is same as observed the previous District Magistrate in the preceding paras.
7. That it is humbly submitted that on joint inspection of the site in question, it was found that no developmental activities have been carried out. No new trees have been cut from the site. Vide Memo No. LFA-II/2022/932-35 dated 24.08.2022, instructions have been issued to the concerned official/persons to ensure that no development work shall be taken up at the impugned site, no standing trees shall be cut and no third party rights be created in the project on the basis of licence in question. In addition to above O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -10- instructions, the Commissioner of Police has also been requested to direct the Chowki Incharge to make regular inspections at the site in question. Copies of the said letters dated 24.08.2022 and dated 06.09.2022 are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-R/8 Et ANNEXURE- R/9 respectively."
10. None has appeared for the applicant. We have heard learned counsel for the respondents and gone through the record.
11. Admittedly, the area under consideration in OA No. 69/2022 is recorded as Gair Mumkin Pahar in revenue estate of Sarai Khawaja. The same does not fall under any reserved or protected forest. No specific notification under section 4 or 5 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 has been issued in respect of the same. In view of applicability of section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900, there is restriction of felling of trees without prior permission of DFO. This Tribunal had vide order dated 05.03.2019 passed in O.A. No. 407 of 2017 had declared the land under consideration as a deemed forest but the above said order was challenged by filing Civil Appeal No. 4977/2019 titled as M/s Ajay Enterprise Private Limits vs. Lt. Col (retd.) Sarvdaman Oberoi and others and Civil Appeal No. 17135/2019 titled as State of Haryana Vs. Lt. Col (retd.) Sarvdaman Oberoi and others before Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 08.04.2022 directed the above said appeal to be listed after the pronouncement of judgment in SLP NO. 10294 of 2013. The judgment in the connected in SLP NO. 10294 of 2013 has been pronounced by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 21.07.2022 but Civil Appeal No. 4977/2019 titled as M/s Ajay Enterprise Private Limits vs. Lt. Col (retd.) Sarvdaman Oberoi and others and Civil Appeal No. 17135/2019 titled as State of Haryana Vs. Lt. Col (retd.) Sarvdaman Oberoi and others are yet to be decided.
12. Earlier the land in question in the present case was being used since early 60's by Mr. Maharishi Ayurveda Product Private Limited for the manufacture of Ayurvedic, Unani and Siddha Drug. Subsequently, factory in O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -11- the name of M/s Age of Enlightenment of publication was registered in the land in question. License in favour of M/s Maharishi Ayurveda Product Private Limited was extended till 31.12.2016. Respondent no. 1 submitted applications for grant of license on the total land measuring of 8.41 acers which was rejected by the Town and Country Planning Department vide memo dated 29.11.2013 and 02.06.2016. Respondent no. 1 again applied for grant of license for setting up of affordable residential colony on land measuring 5.01 acers but subsequently changed its request vide letter dated 07.09.2021 and applied for license for setting up of affordable residential plotted colony on land measuring 5.00625 acers under Deen Dyal Jan Aawas Yojna Scheme 2016 (DDJY Scheme). License no. 50 of 2022 was issued with conditions which including the following conditions:-
" That the final decision of state level committee on the recommendation of District Level Sub Committee regarding inclusion/exclusion of applied and from NCZ category shall be binding upon you and you shall abide by the same. In case of any decision of state level committee contrary to recommendation of District Level Committee, the license shall be withdrawn and no claim, what so ever, shall be entertained"
Due to the above said condition, the HARERA Punchkula did not register the Project of respondent no. 1. On request of respondent no. 1 the above said condition was partly modified as under: -
" That you shall abide by the final outcome of the decision taken on the issue of NCZ as per the recommendation of State Level Committee regarding the exclusion site from NCZ pocket."
Even the modified condition was not considered by HARERA Punchkula and application of respondent no. 1 for registration of the project is also pending with the HARERA Punchkula.
13. It may be observed here that License No. 50 of 2022 issued in favour of respondent no. 1 has been suspended by the Director General, Town and O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -12- Country Planning vide order dated 06.07.2022 till the finalization of the issue of NCT in District Faridabad. The relevant part of the order reads as under:-
"7. The ground trothing recommendations of DLSC at Faridabad are yet to be accepted by the SLC (NCZ) and approved by the Government on the lines as decided in the above mentioned districts. Hence, the NCZ areas are yet to attain finality for the said district.
8. In view of above facts, the matter has been re-examined observed that the finalization of areas under NCZ in District Faridabad is likely to take time. Therefore, license no. 50 of 2022 dated 22.04.2022 is hereby suspended till the finalization of the issue of NCZ in District Faridabad."
14. Respondent no. 1 has submitted in its reply that respondent no. 1 was applying to various Authority/Department for requisite approvals/permission and till date did not create third party rights in absence of the requisite permissions. In his Action Taken Report dated 13.09.2022 District Magistrate, Faridabad has also mentioned that as per the information received vide Tehsildar memo no. 1103 dated 16.08.2022, the impugned land is under the ownership of project proponent i.e. M/s SVC Ventures and Lahari Builder and no further registration of any sale deed has been executed in the said land and that as per the report submitted by the project proponent vide letter received on 18.08.2022, no third party rights have been created by said licensee under the license granted for the project area.
15. In his Action Taken Report, the District Magistrate, Faridabad has also mentioned that instructions have been issued to the concerned official/persons to ensure that no development work shall be taken up at the impugned site, no standing trees shall be cut and no third party rights be created in the project on the basis of licence in question. In addition to above instructions, the Commissioner of Police has also been requested to direct the Chowki Incharge to make regular inspections at the site in question.
16. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that no further intervention by this Tribunal in exercise of the O. A. No. 69/2022 Parul Bawa Vs. State of Haryana -13- jurisdiction under section I of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 on the present application is warranted at this stage and the application is disposed of accordingly.
17. However, any of the parties having any grievance at any subsequent stage shall be at liberty to move this Tribunal for further directions in the matter as may be considered necessary.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr.Afroz Ahmad, EM September 14, 2022 AG