High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/21036/2017disposed of

Amar Singh & Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

2017-09-15Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih2 pages

CWP-21036-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-21036-2017 Date of Decision: September 15, 2017 Amar Singh and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

Present:

Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate, for the petitioners.

ARUN PALLI, J. (ORAL) Notice of motion.

Ms. Safia Gupta, AAG, Haryana, present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Copy of the writ petition furnished. For, the nature of order, I propose to pass in the matter, no formal written statements/counter affidavits are indeed necessary on behalf of the respondents, at this stage. Thus, with the consent of parties, this petition is being disposed of finally.

A writ in the nature of mandamus is prayed for; directing the respondents to issue an 'instrument of Annuity' to the petitioners in terms of the R.R. Policy dated 07.12.2007 (Annexure P-1). Concededly, land holdings of the petitioners were acquired by the respondents for development and utilization of land as residential and commercial Sectors 9, 10, 11 & 11-A, Fatehabad. In terms of the policy dated 07.12.2007 (Annexure P-1), the claimant/landowners are entitled to annuity. The Prashant Kapoor 2017.09.15 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP-21036-2017 grievance of the petitioners is that respondents have failed to credit annuity for the year 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 in their respective accounts. So much so, the repeated visits as also the representations served upon the respondents have failed to evoke any response. And no result is insight either. Rather, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are entitled to be awarded suitable interest for the delay that has occurred in disbursing the amount.

In response, learned State counsel submits that the claim of the petitioners as also their representation dated 25.06.2017 (Annexure P-3) shall be considered and decided within four weeks from today and the appropriate orders shall be passed in this regard. That being so, this petition is disposed of, in terms of the statement made by learned State counsel. However, the petitioners shall be at liberty to represent the respondents as regards interest on delayed payment of their claims. And, in the event, any such representation(s) is made the same shall be considered and decided by the respondents in accordance with law.

(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE September 15, 2017 Pkapoor Whether Speaking/Reasoned:

YES / NO Whether Reportable:

YES / NO Prashant Kapoor 2017.09.15 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document