← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/8904/2018disposed of

Lovina Singla Advocate v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2018-04-16Mr. Justice R.C. Kathuria (Retd.),Mr. Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu2 pages

CWP-8904-2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-8904-2018 Date of Decision: 16.4.2018 Lovina Singla, Advocate ....Petitioner.

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL PRESENT: Mr. D.C. Dhaula, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

1.

In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letter dated 24.10.2017 (Annexure P-3) directing her to deposit ` 12,97,944/-. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to supply the details of amount and interest.

2.

In pursuance to the advertisement issued by the Haryana Urban Development Authority for the allotment of plot to the Advocates from the Advocates quota, the petitioner applied for a plot. In the draw of lots, the petitioner was successful and she was allotted a plot measuring 14 marlas vide allotment letter dated 21.5.2012 (Annexure P-1). The petitioner was offered possession vide letter dated 27.8.2012 (Annexure P-2). Respondent No.3 vide letter dated 24.10.2017 (Annexure P-3) directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of ` 12,97,944/- on account of enhancement of compensation. Gurbachan Singh 2018.04.20 13:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-8904-2018 -2Accordingly, the petitioner moved a representation dated 31.10.2017 (Annexure P-4) to respondent No.3 for supply of information regarding enhancement of compensation, but to no effect. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 23.11.2017 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.3 for the said purpose, but no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner has moved a representation dated 31.10.2017 (Annexure P-4) followed by a legal notice dated 23.11.2017 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.3, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

4.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by directing respondent No.3 to take a decision on the representation dated 31.10.2017 (Annexure P-4) followed by a legal notice dated 23.11.2017 (Annexure P-5), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE April 16, 2018 (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.04.20 13:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document