High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/16994/2015disposed of

Virender Kumar And ANR v. State Of Haryana & ORS

2017-11-28Mr. Justice M.M. Aggarwal,Mr. Justice Jitendra Chauhan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-16994-2015 (O&M) Date of decision:- 28.11.2017 Virender Kumar and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present:- Mr. Jagjot Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Ayuwan Singh, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No. 1.

Mr. Deepak Balyan, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 4.

* * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, C.J. (ORAL) The Division Bench of this Court passed the following order dated 20.02.2017:- "Since the Conveyance Deed executed in favour of the petitioners pursuant to the allotment of plot is for an area measuring 156 sq. yards, the Estate Officer-II, HUDA, Gurugram is directed to allot an alternative plot of the same size to the petitioners which must be free from litigation as well as all sorts of encumbrances preferably in the same Sector or adjoining Sector.

The compliance affidavit be filed failing which the Estate Officer-II, HUDA, Gurugram shall remain present in Court to explain as to why exemplary costs be not imposed.

List for 16.08.2017.

Amodh Sharma 2017.11.28 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-16994-2015 (O&M) Let a dasti copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Deepak Balyan, Advocate for HUDA for information and necessary compliance."

By a further order dated 21.03.2017, the order dated 20.02.2017 was corrected by stipulating that the area of the plot would be 156 sq. meters and not 156 sq. yards. The order of the Division Bench in fact disposed of the petition. The petition was thereafter kept only for compliance. On 20.09.2017, we granted the respondents' request for an adjournment as it was stated that the respondents intended filing an application for reviewing the order dated 20.02.2017 read with the order dated 21.03.2017. The respondents are always at liberty to file an application for review which would be heard by the Division Bench that passed the order dated 20.02.2017.

The petition, therefore, in effect stands disposed of in terms of the order dated 20.02.2017 read with the order dated 21.03.2017.

(S.J. VAZIFDAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU) JUDGE 28.11.2017 Amodh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Amodh Sharma 2017.11.28 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh