Ashok Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

C.W.P. No. 13495 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P. No. 13495 of 2024 Date of decision: 30.05.2024 Ashok Kumar .... Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

Present:

Mr. S.K. Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner.

ARUN PALLI, J (Oral) A certiorari is prayed for to quash the order dated 23.02.2023 (P-4), whereby the claim of the petitioner for allotment of suitable plot under the oustee quota has since been rejected. Further, to command the respondents to allot a plot to the petitioner under the Oustees Policy dated 18.03.1992.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ex facie the impugned order, vide which the claim of the petitioner has been rejected, is erroneous and bereft of reasons:

"Please refer to the subject cited above. In this regard, it is informed that your application dated 19.12.2018 has been duly considered and as per screening committee report, your case has been rejected".

Served with the advance copy of the petition, Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana is present in Court. At the outset, he, as always, fairly submits, for the impugned order is apparently perverse and non speaking, the same is indefensible. Therefore, he submits that the same be deemed to have been re-called/withdrawn, as the competent authority shall now pass a fresh order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

DEEPAK KUMAR 2024.05.31 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh

C.W.P. No. 13495 of 2024 That being so, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that let the petition be disposed of in terms of the statement made by learned State counsel.

In the wake of the position sketched out above, and in terms of the statements made by learned counsel for the parties, this petition is accordingly disposed of.

This Court is sanguine that the authority shall consider/examine the matter in the right earnest, and pass comprehensive orders, assigning reasons in support thereof.

Needless to assert that this order shall not constitute an expression of opinion on the merits of the case of either party, for, as indicated earlier, the competent authority shall examine the grievances of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law.

(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE 30.05.2024 deepak Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR 2024.05.31 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh