RAVINDER BHASIN Vs. UNION TERRITORY (CHANDIGARH) AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by way of instant writ petition, seeks to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court, under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuing a writ in the nature of Certiorari, for setting aside the orders dated 22.12.1980 and order dated 30.4.1997, with a further prayer for issuing a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to allot him a 10 marla plot bearing No. 711, in Industrial Area, phase-II, Chandigarh.

(2.) This case has a long and chequered history. However, putting the facts into a narrow compass, it is noted that applications were invited for allotment of industrial plots in the year 1977. Petitioner submitted an application dated 30.11.1977 for allotment of an industrial plot of one kanal in Industrial Area, phase-II, Chandigarh, along with necessary documents and deposited the requisite amount of Rs. 1,000/-. It is further alleged that papers submitted by the petitioner were found in order and he was asked to attend the office of District Industries Officer on 1.6.1978, vide communication dated 22.5.1978 (Annexure P-1). In response thereto, petitioner attended the office of the competent authority. Thereafter, vide communication dated 3.3.1979 (Annexure P-2), petitioner was intimated that in case he intended to have his application considered for allotment of industrial plot, he may give his consent along with 10% as earnest money towards cost of the plot. Petitioner deposited the amount of Rs. 750/-, vide receipt dated 8.8.1989. However, respondent No.3 intimated the petitioner, vide letter dated 20.9.1979 (Annexure P-3), that name of the petitioner was decided to be considered for allotment of an industrial plot measuring 10 marlas through draw of lots, which was to be held in Panchayat Bhawan, Sector 18, Chandigarh on 9.10.1979 at 10:30 a.m.

(3.) It has also been alleged that in response to the letter (Annexure P-3), petitioner furnished the requisite information and necessary documents. It is further pleaded that he was successful in the draw of lots and plot No. 711, phase II, Chandigarh, measuring 10 marlas was allotted to him. However, respondent authorities, vide letter dated 5.12.1979 (Annexure P-4), intimated the petitioner that Chandigarh Administration had a proposal under consideration to allot an industrial plot measuring 10/5 marlas. Petitioner was issued a letter of intent, it was thought desirable that the allottee or his firm or company should furnish an affidavit that he did not own any industrial plot/industrial shed in Chandigarh. It was also requested to furnish detailed plan showing the extent of utilisation of the earlier industrial site and his turnover of the last three years. It has also been alleged that in the meantime, the petitioner made number of representations to the respondent authorities to hand over the possession of the plot claiming himself to be successful in the above said draw of lots, but the respondents failed to do so. However, no representation in this regard is available on record.