DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

First FIR after SC rebuke over PLPA amendment

  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
A lawyer shows the ongoing construction in the restricted area of Aravallis in Faridabad. Tribune photo
Advertisement

Bijendra Ahlawat

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Faridabad, March 10

Advertisement

The Forest Department has got an FIR lodged against a resident of Anangpur village here on charges of carrying out construction illegally in the PLPA-restricted forest area of Surajkund here.

This is first FIR after the recent Supreme Court order, in which the state government had been warned and rebuked by the court for the move to amend the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA) on March 8.

Advertisement

Revealing this, lawyer LN Parashar said that the FIR has been registered against Baljit Singh of Anangpur village at the Surajkund police station on Saturday.

Parashar, who had raised the matter through a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner and Chief Secretary, Haryana Government, on Friday, had alleged that construction activity was being carried out in the PLPA region despite the recent Supreme Court order.

Claiming that while it amounted to contempt of court, he charged that the local authorities, including the Forest Department, had failed to implement the court order. Thus, they had allowed the land mafia to carry on its illegal activities in violation of all norms, resulting in acute damage to the green cover.

While the case has been registered under the relevant Section of PLPA and Section 188 of the IPC (disobedience of the order promulgated by public servant), Parashar alleged that the officials concerned, which include those of Municipal Corporation Faridabad, Forest and Mining Department, were also responsible for the violation and were required to be booked under Section 217 (disobedience to direction of law), 218 (public servant framing incorrect record to save others from punishment) and 219 (public servant corruptly making report) of the IPC.

He said he had already become a party to the Kant Enclave case already in the purview of the Supreme Court.

“I will soon file a contempt petition in court over the violations going on in the PLPA-ruled area in the district after collecting evidence,” he said. More than 10,000 acres in the district fall under the PLPA.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts