Illegal land sale deed of Manesar plot to be probed

GURUGRAM: The district administration of Gurugram has ordered an inquiry into the registry of a plot, which is a part of 688 acres in Manesar, Naurangpur and Nakhraul that belongs to the Haryana State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (HSIIDC), following a Supreme Court decision on March 12.

The administration took cognizance of the offence following a media report mentioning the registration of the property after the Supreme Court directed the Haryana government to compensate the farmers of the three villages for the land.

The farmers in 2014 had moved a petition before the Punjab and Haryana high court against the Bhupinder Singh Hooda led Congress government demanding their land back.

The HC dismissed their petition in December 2014. The farmers filed an appeal in the SC in January 2015 against the decision of the HC.

The SC, in its decision on March 12, 2018, restored the land to the Haryana government and directed them to compensate farmers and flat buyers.“as the 688 acres is vested with the HSIIDC, the owners do not have the right to sell the plot. As a sale has happened, this reveals connivance of the officials of the revenue department, who must have done this for monetary gains. We have no idea how many plots have been sold after the Supreme Court order. We got to know about it through a news report,” Naresh Yadav, one of the complainants who had moved the Supreme Court in 2015, said.

The registry clerk, computer operator and tehsildar concerned are under the scanner and a probe is underway.

Sanjiv Singla, subdivisional magistrate (SDM), north Gurugram, has been asked to inquire into the matter and submit a report on Monday.

CM Manohar Lal Khattar, on being informed of the registry, had ordered action in this regard. The district administration suspended the registry clerk and terminated the computer operator’s services on Friday. “We will submit a report to the deputy commissioner of Gurugram on Monday,” said Singla.

The government’s land acquisition notices sections 4, 6 and 9 were in force between 2007 and 2010, when the 688 acres were purchased by several builders. “The government had released the land in favour of builders who purchased it at low rates, much below the prevailing market rate,” Om Prakash, another complainant who had moved the SC, said. He said that the reports of the sale of land under this area must be probed.