Sanjeev Bhatia And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.25095 of 2015 Date of Decision: December 02, 2015 Sanjeev Bhatia and others ....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

--- Present: Mr.Namit Khurana, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.-

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) At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is a typographical mistake re: description of respondents No.2 as instead of 'Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad', he has inadvertently impleaded 'Deputy Commissioner, Yamuna Nagar'. On his oral request, the mistake is ordered to be rectified. Learned counsel is permitted to make necessary correction in the original paper book under his signatures.

The petitioners are residents of village Damkaura, Tehsil Tohana, District Fatehabad. They claim themselves to be living Below the Poverty Line (BPL) to whom the Gram Panchayat decided to allot plots of 100 square yards under the Government Policy dated 01.02.2008 (P-1). The grievance of the petitioners is that though they are fully eligible for such allotment under the aforesaid Government Policy, but the MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.12.15 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.25095 of 2015 [2] respondents are not considering their claim for undisclosed reasons. It is alleged that the respondents have allotted plots to ineligible persons who are not entitled to such allotment. Against such alleged allotment, the petitioners have made a representation-cum-complaint dated 10.08.2015 to the Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad but finding no response thereto, the petitioners have approached this Court.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners 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 in its true letter and spirit, we dispose of this writ petition, without expressing any views on the merits, with a direction to respondent nos.2 to 4 to verify the claim of the petitioners as contained in their representation-cum-complaint dated 10.08.2015 (P-3) and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. No decision adverse to the interest of allottees shall be taken without giving them opportunity of hearing.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE December 02, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.12.15 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh