Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

W.P.(C) 5627/2020

4. The petitioner here purchased agricultural land by way of a sale deed dated 5 May 2010. Proceedings under Section 81 of the DLR in respect of that land are stated to have commenced consequent to the submission of a report dated 22 March 2016 by the Halqa Patwari alleging that construction activity was being undertaken on agricultural land. On the receipt of that report, an interim order of restraint came to be issued on 31 March 2016. In terms of that order, the petitioners were called upon to restore the land to its original agricultural status failing which further proceedings under Section 81 would be taken. The petitioner submitted a reply to the aforesaid show cause notice asserting therein that the constructions which were being raised merely amounted to an "improvement" as defined in Section 3(12) of the DLR and would thus not amount to an unauthorised construction. It was further asserted that the land in any case had come to be included in a notification issued under Section 507 of the DMC Act on 16 May 2017 and that consequently no justification existed for drawl of proceedings under Section 81. Accepting the contentions as set forth, the SDM by an order of 15 June 2019 closed the proceedings and held that Section 81 would no longer be applicable by virtue of the land having become urbanized and as evidenced consequent to its inclusion in the notification issued under Section 507 of the DMC Act. The respondents thereafter preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. During the pendency of that appeal, it is further disclosed that the area in question had come to be included in a notification dated 28 January 2019 issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and classified as part of the "Land Pulling Policy" as framed by the DDA. The writ petition itself came to be preferred during the pendency of that appeal. During the pendency of the present writ petition, the District Magistrate by an order of 1 September 2020, proceeded to allow the appeal of the Gaon Sabha holding that since proceedings under Section 81 had come to be initiated prior to the issuance of the notification under Section 507, the SDM had clearly erred in closing the proceedings. The District Magistrate while allowing the appeal also took into consideration a report of the Patwari dated 18 December 2019 to record that a farmhouse had been constructed on the land in question thus clearly constituting a violation of the Act. The Collector accordingly proceeded to set aside the order of 15 June 2019 and directed vesting of the land in the Gaon Sabha. The order of 1 September 2020 has since been assailed in these proceedings consequent to an amendment application which was moved in these proceedings and was allowed by the Court.

Sub-Section 3 enacts that if the whole of the Gaon Sabha ceases to be included in rural area as defined in the DMC Act 1957 by virtue of a notification under Section 507 of that Act, the Gaon Sabha constituted for that area shall thereupon stand dissolved. This Sub-section in fact lays down in Clauses (a) to (f) the consequences which shall accrue on the dissolution of the Gaon Sabha on the whole area for which it was constituted ceasing to be included in rural areas. A whole some reading of this section (as quoted hereinabove) shows that the nomenclature of the Gaon Sabha and Gaon Sabha Areas have been changed and hereinafter all references made to Gaon Sabha and Gaon Panchayats would be construed as references to the Central Government. Section 150(3) specifically postulates that once a Gaon Sabha Area ceases to be included in rural area (as defined in the DMC Act, by virtue of a notification under Section 507(a) of the said Act) the Gaon Sabha will stand dissolved. Clause (e) states that the provisions of this Act (DLRA) would apply in relation to land in such Gaon Sabha, not being land vested in the Central Government under Clause (a). Sections 150(4) & (5) of the DLRA also clarify the position. After a portion of the Gaon Sabha ceases to be included as a rural area or the size of the Gaon Sabha is reduced as a result of a portion ceasing to be included in a rural area, the said portion or area will be reconstituted. The whole of Section 150 in fact deals with the establishment and incorporation of the Gaon Sabha and Gaon Sabha Area. It does not in any manner affect the provisions of Section 507(a) of the DMC Act which read with the ratio and the proposition of law laid down in Trikha Ram (supra) and Indu Khorana (supra) has held that once a rural area is declared to be urban, it is excluded from the purview of the "village abadi land" and being no longer "land" as defined in the DLRA it is excluded from its purview. Section 150 of the DLRA does not in any manner impinge upon this provision of law."

23. I agree with the argument which is urged on behalf of the plaintiff that a notification for urbanization need not only be through a notification under Section 507 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act as the later part of Section 3(13) of the Act does not in any way require that there is only one manner of notification viz only under Section 507 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. This later part of Section 3(13) of the Act does not talk of a notification only under Section 507 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. The requirement of this later part of Section 3(13) of the Act is only that a notification is issued in the Official Gazette to make the land as part of the Delhi town and New Delhi town. Once a notification is issued applying a zonal plan issued pursuant to the master plan showing that subject lands are covered under the zonal plan issued by the DDA, in such a situation, it has to be held that the lands cease to be the lands covered under the Act because of issuance of a notification in the Official Gazette results in the lands becoming part of the Delhi town. Additional reasoning on this aspect can be understood from the object and the language found in Section 1 and Sections 3(5) and 3(15) of the Act and which Sections show that once an area falls within a town area and an area ceases to be an agricultural land because it has to be developed as part of the development of the Delhi town or New Delhi town, then such an area no longer remains an agricultural area for being covered under the expression land as defined in Section 3(13) of the Act. With humility, I am in complete agreement with the observations made by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Guru Pratap Singh (supra) and which arrives at the same conclusion that once the land ceases to be agricultural, the land ceases to be the subject matter of the Act."
specifically excludes areas falling within the domain of the District Board of Delhi which may come to be subsequently included in a notification issued under Section 507 thereof. All areas of Delhi which do not fall within rural areas are defined to mean "urban areas". Apart from the general obligations and functions which the Corporations constituted under the DMC Act are to discharge, Chapter XVI empowers them to exercise a power of general supervision over all building activity which may be undertaken in areas falling within their respective jurisdictions. Section 507 empowers a Corporation to declare that any part of a rural area shall cease to be included therein and consequently form part of an urban area. The consequence of the aforesaid declaration is that the said area then becomes subject to the control and superintendence of the particular Corporation and the provisions of the DMC Act. The impact of the issuance of a notification under Section 507 is also spelt out in Section 150 (3) of the DLR which enjoins that upon the promulgation of such a notification, the Gaon Sabha would stand dissolved and all properties which stand vested in that authority would vest in the Union Government. All interests, obligations, liabilities of the Gaon Sabha flowing from contracts stand taken over and assumed by the Union.