Today in New Delhi, India
Sep 18, 2018-Tuesday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

Former Gurgaon collector’s order on Gwal Pahari land set aside

Gurgaon divisional commissioner has set aside the Gwal Pahari land order of former Gurgaon district collector TL Satyaprakash

gurgaon Updated: Feb 24, 2017 11:20 IST
Dhananjay Jha
Dhananjay Jha
Hindustan Times
Gurgaon,Gwalpahari,TL Satyaprakash
The Gurgaon-Faridabad Road, along which Gwal Pahari village is located, is an upcoming real estate destination in the Aravalli region.(Parveen Kumar/HT File Photo)

Stating that the issue of land in Gwal pahari village is a very complex matter, divisional commissioner, Gurgaon, D Suresh on Thursday set aside the previous order of former Gurgaon district collector TL Satyaprakash.

Suresh was hearing the appeal of the Municipal Corporation of Gurugram (MCG) against Satyaprakash’s order.

“It is a complex matter. It has seen a series of orders – for and against – in the past four decades and even now one can challenge my order if not happy. I have set aside Satyaprakash’s order on facts presented before the court by the MCG. It is an open court and I have done this in my quasi-judicial capacity,” said Suresh.

The Gurgaon-Faridabad Road, along which Gwal Pahari village is located, is an upcoming real estate destination in the Aravalli region. The chunk of land in the village has been mutated in the name of the MCG and, on that basis, the corporation has been sending notices to individuals to vacate it.

The corporation said notices were sent earlier too after a land survey by the tehsildar concerned. The survey was carried out after Gwal Pahari village came under the jurisdiction of the municipal corporation in 2010.

In July 2014, while hearing petition of an SEZ, former financial commissioner of revenue (FCR), Haryana, Yudhvir Singh Malik, had set aside the mutation no. 3110 in favour of MCG as it was ‘forged, fabricated and
antedated’. Later, MCG got mutation no. 3249 sanctioned in its favour.

In January this year, an administrative inquiry, conducted by Satyaprakash, on the directions of the chief secretary and the chief minister had found that that mutation no. 3249 was sanctioned in favour of MCG without following due process of law and in gross violation of the orders of two FCRs as well as restraint order from the civil court. Satyaprakash had sent the report to the government for legal opinion.

In Thursday’s hearing, representatives of the parties concerned sternly fought their arguments. The land owners’ lawyer vehemently argued that there is a stay from civil court on dispossession and ownership of
the land was never decided, and hence, the MCG has no claim.

A lawyer arguing on behalf of an individual land owner said, “The contentious mutation no. 3249 is the basis for MCG to claim ownership of the Gwal Pahari land recorded in the name of individuals and companies in the jamabandi. No civil court ever decided it in favour of the corporation. We are surprised that the divisional commissioner admitted repeatedly that this is a very complex matter as title and ownership is not yet decided. We will decide about further action later.”

However, a top Haryana government official told Hindustan Times, “It seems the four-decade old dispute of title and owners will see an end soon. But it is still surprising why no appeal was made by the MCG against the orders of Yudhvir Malik and SS Dhillon, who had quashed MCG’s mutation before Satyaprakash.”

MCG commissioner V Umashankar refused comment.

First Published: Feb 24, 2017 00:09 IST