CHANDAN RATRA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allot the area in question which is adjacent to the area of the petitioner in view of the policy decision of the Government vide Ann. P. 7.

(2.) THE brief facts are: The petitioner is claiming to be the owner of the premises No. 1-D/14, BP situated in the NIT, Faridabad, measuring about 18 sq. Yds. The boundaries of the said plot are as follows: North : The adjacent land belong to the Ministry of Rehabilitation in possession of the Plaintiff. South : Remaining portion of the premises I-D/14, BP, NIT, Faridabad. East: Remaining portion of the premises I-D/14, BP, NIT, Faridabad. West: Road. According to the petitioner, originally the entire plot I-D/14, BP, NIT, Faridabad belonged to one Mohan Lal Ratra and after his death the same was inherited by his widow Sheela Devi who executed a registered Will dated 13. 3. 1985 in respect of 89 sq. yards out of the land of plot No. 1-D/14 BP, NIT, Faridabad in favour of the petitioner. There was some litigation between Sheela Devi and Gurdwara Singh Sabha in civil suit No. 164 of 1985 and that the said suit was later compromised on 16. 5. 1986 and by virtue of the said compromise, the petitioner became absolute owner of 89 sq. yards. Adjacent to 89 sq. yards there is land belonging to the Ministry of Rehabilitation measuring 60'x15'. As the strip of land is adjacent to the plot of the petitioner, it is under occupation of the petitioner. The petitioner also gave the same on rent on temporary basis for exhibition of the handloom in the year 1982 to the 4th respondent who put up a tent in the land measuring 15'x25' and he has also been-paying rent of the vacant land to the Gurdwara Singh Sabha who was authorised by Sheela Devi to collect the rent. The Government of India issued a Policy decision on 28. 2. 1984 in regard to disposal of the adjacent land belonging to Rehabilitation Department to the owners adjoining the same. Thus the land of the Department of Rehabilitation amalgamated with the plot of the petitioner bearing No. 1-D/14, BP, NIT, Faridabad and therefore, the land in which the 4th respondent put up tent is partially with the petitioner's land and partially adjacent to the land belonging to the Rehabilitation Department. In view of the policy decision of the Government, the petitioner is entitled to the said land as he is the owner of the land adjacent to the said land. The petitioner made several representations to the State of Haryana for transfer of the said land to him at the rate fixed by the State as he has been in occupation of the same. But the 4th respondent also approached the State of Haryana for allotment as he claimed himself to be the occupant thereof but as the petitioner could not challenge the legality of the instructions and notification issued by the Government, he filed the present writ petition. Therefore he prayed for a direction to respondents to allot the land adjacent to his land to him.

(3.) THE petitioner is basing his claim for the land adjacent to the land owned by him on the policy decision taken by the Haryana Government in regard to the disposal of the land situated between the national highway and the private lands. The said policy in regard to the disposal of the adjacent land was issued on 28. 2. 1984. According to the said Memo, the land between the main road and the houses had to be sold to the occupants. The petitioner is claimed to be an occupant of the land adjacent to the Government land whereas the 4th respondent is claiming that he is the occupant of that land. The 4th respondent already purchased the said property and he has deposited the amount and a sale certificate has also been issued to him.