Qaisar Jahan v. Financial Commissioner Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-7640-2014 Date of decision:- 19.11.2015 Mrs. Qaisar Jahan

...Petitioner

Versus

Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, Chandigarh and others.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA Present: Mr. Kul Bhushan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. P.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 to 4 - HUDA.

* * * * S.J. VAZIFDAR, A.C.J. (ORAL) On 31.08.2000, the petitioner was allotted an industrial plot admeasuring 250 sq yards. The payment in respect thereof was made. On 08.07.2003, a possession certificate was issued. The petitioner, however, states that in fact physical possession of the plot was not handed over to her. 2.

Whether physical possession of the plot was handed over or not is one of the most important issues of fact to be decided in this case. On the one hand, by a letter dated 02.08.2005, the petitioner admitted having got possession of the plot by a memo dated 08.07.2003 and on the other in reply to the show cause notice the petitioner stated that she was unable to put up the construction within the period stipulated on account of an encroachment, namely, a tea stall and mazar thereon. The petitioner relies upon the minutes of the proceedings before the revisional authority dated 17.04.2007 which record that there was a mazar and tea stall which were removed later on and AMODH SHARMA 2015.11.20 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CWP-7640-2014 that the report was available on the noting of the plot file. The status report, however, does not state when the mazar and tea stall were put up, namely, whether they were put up when possession was allegedly given on 08.07.2003 or whether they were put up thereafter. 3.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 4, however, states that there is no such noting. 4.

The authorities under the Act have not considered this important issue, namely, regarding the existence of the encroachment on the plot. The entire case would depend upon the finding in this regard. 5.

In these circumstances, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remanded to the revisional authority for a fresh consideration of the matter. It will be open to the revisional authority to remand the matter further, if necessary.

6.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (S.J. VAZIFDAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE 19.11.2015 Amodh AMODH SHARMA 2015.11.20 10:33 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh