Demolition drive in airport vicinity deferred, yet again

Sanjay Bumbroo

Tribune News Service

Mohali, February 3

A demolition drive to be carried out in the vicinity of the airport by the Zirakpur Municipal Council today had to be deferred once again as the civic body failed to get security cover for the purpose.

The demolition drive is to be conducted by the Mohali administration to raze 83 odd illegal structures located 100 meters from the defence installation in Zirakpur as per the directions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Earlier, the drive was deferred on January 6 due to immense cold wave and bad weather conditions. It could not be conducted on January 7 and then on January 20 due to non-availability of security cover.

Sukhvinder Singh Randhawa, Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Zirakpur, said they were yet to get police protection to conduct the drive. He said they were expecting to get the security cover within three to four days, following which they would start the drive.

On the orders of the High Court, the Mohali administration had issued notices to the owners of 83 such structures, which have been constructed within the radius of 100 metres from the boundary wall of the defence installation. The administration had given them two-week time, which ended on January 7, to remove the structures on their own.

Meanwhile, some of the owners had moved the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the demolition of their structures. However, the apex court told them to revert to the High Court.

It is pertinent to mention here that following the order of the High Court, the administration had on September 18, 2019, given 15-day notice to the owners of 98 illegal structures falling within the 100-metre radius of the airport boundary wall under the Works of Defence Act, 1903. The demolition drive was to carried out on illegal structures constructed after March 9, 2011, in Bhabat village and after March 11, 2011, in Jagatpura village in the vicinity of the Air Force station, Chandigarh. All such structures have been termed illegal under the Works of Defence Act.

According to information, only 15 of the 98 owners, who were issued notices, were able to adduce evidence that their structures were existing prior to March 9, 2011. About 65 owners, who got the notices, have not disputed the position that their structures have been raised after the public notice of March 9, 2011.

Therefore, the remaining 83 structures were raised in contravention of the Act and hence, liable to be demolished. There is no question of paying any compensation qua the structure, rather the owners might be liable to pay the cost of demolition.