Dilbag Singh And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 5.4.2018 Dilbag Singh and others ....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL PRESENT: Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Advocate for the respondent-HUDA. 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 certiorari for quashing the policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-8). Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to allot plots to the petitioners under the oustees quota. 2.

The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners, namely, Shri Baldev Singh was owner of the land measuring 42 kanal 2 marla situated within the revenue estate of village Ugra Kheri, District Panipat as per jamabandi for the year 2001-02 (Annexure P-1). The said land was acquired by the Government of Haryana vide award dated 28.2.1996 for residential and commercial purposes of Sector 24, Panipat. A policy dated

-210.9.1987 (Annexure P-2) was framed by the Government of Haryana for the allotment of plots as well as commercial sites to the land owners whose land had compulsorily been acquired by the HUDA. The said policy was amended vide policies dated 28.8.1998, 9.5.1990 and 12.3.1993 (Annexures P-3 to P-5, respectively). The Supreme Court vide judgment dated 3.1.2011 (Annexure P-6) held that the persons should, therefore, be allotted plots under the scheme at the initial price at which the layout/sector plots were first offered for sale after the acquisition. The petitioners moved a representation dated 12.10.2012 (Annexure P-7) to respondent No.3 for the allotment of plots under the oustees quota, but to no effect. Thereafter, the respondents issued a policy dated 11.8.

2016 (Annexure P-8) and as per the said policy, the landowner to apply for allotment of plot in fresh advertisement which would be issued after determination of reservation. When no action was taken on the said representation, Annexure P-7, the petitioners moved another representation dated 23.12.2016 (Annexure P-9) to respondents No.2 and 3 for the allotment of plots under the 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 moved the representations dated 12.10.2012 and 23.12.2016 (Annexures P-7 and P-9, respectively) to respondents No.2 and 3, but no action has so far been taken thereon. He, however, prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority by incorporating the grievance as raised in the present writ petition and direction be issued to the authority concerned to decide the representation expeditiously in a time bound manner in accordance with law.

-34.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation raising all the pleas as raised in the present writ petition before the appropriate authority. It is directed that in the event of a representation being filed by the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioners shall be entitled to lead any evidence to substantiate their claim before the concerned authority. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE April 5, 2018 (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No