It was discovered on 6 October 1972 that the kitchen had been re-erected. The District Officer decided to tolerate this illegal structure in the interests of Mr Lui Sung's family.
The position in October 1972, therefore, was that
Mr Lui Sung was allowed to have a house and kitchen on the Crown Land which he held under Permit. This is the position as it exists today.
On the 14th December 1972 Mr Lui Sung wrote to his Excellency the Governor saying that on the 11th March 1972 (not the 13th March 1972 as in paragraph 2 (above) he was told by an officer named Lee that the hut which the District Officer had allowed him to build on Crown Land had to be demolished (there is no reference by Mr Lui Sung to the kitchen which was in fact demolished) and that if Mr Lui Sung did not want it to be demolished he had to pay $200 to Mr Lee. Mr Lui Sung said in his letter that the hut was demolished on the 23rd March 1972 (ie the date on which the kitchen had been demolished as in paragraph 2 above). He said that $850 had been stolen from a trunk inside the house and that he had reported the matter to the police and District Office. He said that in pursuing this matter with the Police and District Office he had been charged with obstruction. He had appeared in Court but the case had been dismissed. Later, on the 29th June 1972 the Tsuen Wan Magistrate had given him $50 (presumably from the poor box). The Magistrate had also given him a letter of introduction to the Legal Aid Department, so that he could take legal action to redress his grievances. He said that after several months the Legal Aid Department advised him that they could not justify engaging a solicitor on his behalf. Mr Lui Sung asked His Excellency to order a thorough investigation into his case and asked for compensation for the loss of the hut and reimbursement of the £850 allegedly stolen and a guarantee that the injustice done to him would not recur.
Mr Lui Sung also said in his letter of 14 December 1972 addressed to His Excellency the Governor that he had been advised by the Supreme Court to refer his case to the UMELCO Office. He had been to the UMLICO Office on the 3rd December 1972 and reported that part of the hut he had erected on Crown Land with the permission of the District Officer had been demolished and a sum of $850 stolen. The Administrative Secretary, UMELCO Office, was asked by the Colonial Secretary to report on this aspect of the case. The Administrative Secretary said that inquiries into the case revealed that the application for legal aid had been rejected because there were no reasonable grounds for instituting proceedings. Mr Lui had subsequently appealed against this decision to the Deputy Registrar, Supreme Court, who upheld. the refusal. The UMELCO Office had been advised by the District Office, Yuen Long, that no further demolition action was contemplated against Mr Lui's structures in future.
UMELCO Office
/had therefore