Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11. The sum and substance of the reply affidavits filed by petitioners to the counters filed by the official respondents is that they are not aware of the complaint given by the unofficial respondent dated 16.05.2017 and the same is not served on them; that the subject wall was in existence for the past 30 years, which is even admitted by the unofficial respondent; that the wall demolished by GHMC on 03.07.2017 is part of the peripheral wall that existed even when the petitioners purchased the property in the year 1985, which was shown in both the group house permissions dated 06.01.1988 and 22.07.1988. It is asserted that the government has claim over the land claimed by the unofficial 5th respondent, which never had access to the property of the petitioners and that it was a forest and there was no access roads to the said property. The allegation that the wall on the road and erection of gate is causing hindrance to the dead-end premises and is the only access to the property of the unofficial respondent is incorrect and invocation of power under Sections 402 and 405 of the GHMC Act is illegal. It is asserted that the petitioners have taken only permissions for alterations and repairs of the buildings and there is no change in the road area access, layout etc., as such, the contention of GHMC that private road converts to public road is false. The provisions of Sections 402 and 405 of GHMC Act have no application to the facts of the case and that the Deputy Commissioner of GHMC is not empowered under the GHMC Act to initiate proceedings under Section 405 and it is only the Commissioner of GHMC who is the appropriate authority to conduct enquiry and pass orders under Section 405. The 5th respondent suppressed all material facts and trying to mislead this Court and that there is no access to her property, as such, GHMC ought not have granted building permission in favour of 5th respondent.

23. A person who owns landed property intends to develop the same, approaches the local authorities for obtaining layout permission and till such permission is obtained, the owner will have title and possession of the property. But the moment when the layout is approved, all the roads shown by him in the layout vests with the local authorities and the owner of the property can no longer claim to be the owner of roads and public places shown in the layout and the general public has a right of access to the public roads and public places like parks etc. It is also a fact that when once the layout is approved by the local authorities, the owner of the land cannot have exclusive title over the roads and open places, meant for public and the development of open places and roads is the responsibility of the local authority.