Amarjit Singh v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CWP-16125-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-16125-2017 Date of Decision: July 18, 2018 Amarjit Singh .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr.Deepak Sabharwal, Advocate for HUDA.

........

SURYA KANT, J.(ORAL) Land of the petitioner measuring 4 kanal 13 marla situated within the revenue estate of village Haripur, Tehsil and District Panchkula, was acquired vide Award No.8 dated 26.07.1973. The petitioner claims that in lieu of the above-stated acquired land he is entitled to allotment of a plot under the 'Oustees Policy', but his claim has not been considered contrary to the judgment of this Court in LPA No.2096 of 2011, decided on 25.04.2012 (Haryana Urban Development Authority and others vs Sandeep and others). The petitioner raised such claim vide representations dated 29.06.2012, 18.02.2015 and 24.04.2017, Annexures P3, P4 and P6 respectively.

[2] We are informed that a new Policy decision has been taken by HUDA which is likely to be notified very soon. We are not aware whether acquisition of 1973 will be covered or not under that Policy? However, if by Meenu 2018.07.25 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CWP-16125-2017 -2virtue of the new Policy or in terms of any other Policy, the petitioner is found eligible for allotment of a plot under the 'Oustees Quota', let his claim as contained in the above mentioned representations, be considered and the same be decided by way of a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. [3] The writ petition is disposed of.

( SURYA KANT ) JUDGE July 18, 2018 ( SUDIP AHLUWALIA ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No Meenu 2018.07.25 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh