SANTOKH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 08.10.2015 (Annexure P-31) passed by respondent No.2-Chairman, Improvement Trust Ludhiana and for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to allot one plot of appropriate size to the petitioners under the Local Displaced Persons Category on reserved price, as per the Rules, which were prevalent at the time of the acquisition of land.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that their mother, Basant Kaur, was owner of residential plot measuring 398 Square Yards within Khasra Nos.418 and 435 in village Taraf Burara, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. In the meantime, Model Town Extension Part II Scheme was sanctioned by the Improvement Trust Ludhiana and a big chunk of land including the above-said residential plot of Basant Kaur was acquired, vide Award of 1978-79. The Improvement Trust Ludhiana had already framed Land Disposal Rules in the year 1964, which were superseded by Rules of 1975. Thereafter, new Rules were framed in 1983. As per the said Rules, Local Displaced Person was entitled to get one plot at concessional rate. No such plot was allotted to Basant Kaur (since deceased) or the petitioners under the aforesaid Rules, despite the fact that application along with earnest money was submitted to Improvement Trust Ludhiana at the relevant time. The other similarly situated persons had already been allotted plots under the aforesaid Rules. Some of the land owners, whose land was acquired, filed writ petitions, which were disposed of by this Court with a direction to consider their cases for allotment of plots, in accordance with the Rules. The case of the petitioners was illegally rejected by respondent No.2, vide impugned order dated 08.10.2015 (Annexure P-31). Not being satisfied by the said order, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners.

(3.) The writ petition is contested by respondent No.2, who filed a short reply, in which, it was pleaded that Harbans Kaur was co-owner of the land in question and in lieu of the acquisition, one plot was allotted to her by the Improvement Trust. In case of joint owners of single acquired land, no more than one plot has to be allotted to such joint owners. The claim of the petitioners is not tenable as in this case one of the co-owners, namely, Harbans Kaur had already been allotted one plot, as per the Rules. It is further pleaded that there is no infirmity in the impugned order dated 08.10.2015 (Annexure P-31) and it is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.