Vakila& ORS. v. State Of Haryana & ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.11824 of 2016 Date of Decision: June 03, 2016 Vakila and others ....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.B.CHAUDHARI.

--- Present: Mr.Pulkit Dagar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Kirti Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. -.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J . (Oral) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 2 only at this stage.

On our asking, Ms.Kirti Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on their behalf. Let two copies of the writ petition be supplied to the State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

CWP No.11824 of 2016 [2] In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter-reply from respondent Nos.1 & 2 or to serve respondent No.3 at this stage as no order on merits prejudicial to its interest is being passed. The petitioners are residents of VPO Khandawali, Tehsil and District Faridabad. They claim themselves to be living Below the Poverty Line (BPL) to whom the Gram Panchayat decided to allot plots of 100 square yards. The grievance is that though the petitioners are fully eligible for such allotments under the 'Mahatma Gandhi Gramin Basti Yojna' which the State Government decided to implement vide Policy memo dated 01.02.2008 (P-1) but the respondents are not considering their claim for no valid reason.

It is further alleged that the respondents have allotted plots to ineligible persons who are not entitled to such allotment. It appears from the averments that an exercise to identify the eligible persons was undertaken and the petitioners were included in such list but no follow up action was taken by the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad or the Gram Panchayat. Having heard their learned counsel and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have placed reliance on a Government Policy which, according to them, has not been given effect, we dispose of this writ petition, without expressing any views on the merits, with a direction to respondent nos.

CWP No.11824 of 2016 [3] period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE June 03, 2016 [A.B.CHAUDHARI] mohinder JUDGE