Satnam Singh And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP No. 19036 of 2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 19036 of 2016 Date of Decision: 14.9.2016 Satnam Singh and others ....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN.

PRESENT: Mr. Rajesh Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

1.

In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to allot a plot to them under the oustee policy. Further, a prayer has been made directing the respondents to decide the representation dated 28.4.2016 (Annexure P-3) sent by the petitioners.

2.

The petitioners were owners in possession of the land measuring 4 bigha 2 biswas being 1/2 share of the total land measuring 8 bigha 4 biswas situated in Patti Insar, Panipat, as per the jamabandi for the year 1983-84. The said land was acquired vide award dated 7.5.1992 (Annexure P-1) for the development and utilization of land as residential/commercial/industrial and institutional area for Sectors 6 to 8, Panipat. Petitioners No.1 and 2 and Ranjit Singh (since deceased) filed Gurbachan Singh 2016.09.15 12:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CWP No. 19036 of 2016 -2reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 27.5.1992 (Annexure P-2). The petitioners moved various representations including a representation dated 28.4.2016 (Annexure P-3) to the Land Acquisition Officer, HUDA, Panipat for allotment of a plot under oustees quota, but no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioners have sent a representation dated 28.4.2016 (Annexure P-3) to the Land Acquisition Officer, HUDA, Panipat, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

4.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by directing respondent No.4 to take a decision on the representation dated 28.4.2016 (Annexure P-3), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE September 14, 2016 (RAMENDRA JAIN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2016.09.15 12:46 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh