Kusum Gupta v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-22038-2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (109) CWP-22038-2024 Date of decision:- 20.11.2024 Kusum Gupta ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. C.M.Munjal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. R.D.Gupta, Advocate and Mr. K.K.Vinayak, Advocate for respondent 5-Society. **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

By way of instant petition, petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter-alia for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to execute conveyance deed in favour of the petitioner as she is a permanent member of the Society-respondent No.5 and has paid the entire amount. 2.

Mr. Munjal, counsel for the petitioner submits that after the deposit of the entire amount, petitioner has been handed over possession vide letter dated 26.09.2003, Annexure P-3 and an allotment-cumpossession letter was issued on 28.06.2004, Annexure P-4. He asserts that despite multiple requests, conveyance deed for the plot is not being executed. He submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 18.12.2015, Annexure P-7, to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Gurugram for the execution of the conveyance deed and despite reminders, no action has been taken.

KAMAL SHARMA 2024.11.22 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh.

CWP-22038-2024 -23.

Advance copy of the petition has been served upon the respondents.

4.

Mr. Gupta, who appears on behalf of the Society-respondent No.5, has referred to order dated 14.11.2018 passed in CWP-24821-2018 titled as A.K.Kaul Versus The State of Haryana & others, which has been clarified vide order dated 01.05.2019 passed in CWP-11322-2019 titled as Vinod Gupta Versus Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana and others. He could not dispute that in similar situation, directions have been issued by this Court directing the official respondents to decide the representation.

5.

Given the nature of order proposed to be passed, this Court does not deem it necessary to issue notice to the respondents and to call upon them to file a response.

6.

Having heard counsel for the parties, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Gurugram-respondent No.5 to decide the representation, Annexure P-7, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order keeping in view of the observations made by this Court in A.K.Kaul's case (supra) and Vinod Gupta's case (supra).

20.11.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL) Kamal JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KAMAL SHARMA 2024.11.22 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh.