Hukam Chand And ORS v. State Of Haryana & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.25229 of 2015 Date of Decision: December 03, 2015 Hukam Chand 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.Rajesh Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Anil Mehta, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. -.-

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) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 2 only at this stage.

On our asking, Mr.Anil Mehta, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on their behalf. Let three copies of the writ petition be supplied to the State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter-reply from respondent Nos.1&2 or to serve respondent No.3 at this stage as no order prejudicial to its interest is being passed. The petitioners are residents of villages Palwali and Badshahpur, Block and District Faridabad. They claim themselves to be living Below the Poverty Line (BPL) to whom MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.12.15 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.25229 of 2015 [2] the Gram Panchayat decided to allot plots of 100 square yards. The petitioners allege that though they are fully eligible for allotment under the 'Mahatma Gandhi Gramin Basti Yojna' which the State Government decided to implement vide Policy memo dated 01.12.2008 but for the reasons best known to them, the respondents are not considering their claim. It further appears from their averments that the eligible persons were identified and the petitioners were included in such list but no follow up action has been taken by the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad or the Gram Panchayat. The petitioners are said to have in this regard represented the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad on 30.06.2014 (P-3) but finding no response thereto, 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, we dispose of this writ petition, without expressing any views on the merits, with a direction to respondent no.2 to verify the claim of the petitioners as contained in their representation dated 30.06.2014 (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. Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE December 03, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.12.15 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh