PURSHOTAM DASS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN area of 5. 5 acres of land was acquired by the State Government in the year 1974 for Improvement Trust Khanna (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trust') for a scheme to develop a shopping centre on Karnail Singh Road, Khanna, popularly known as 'sri Guru Amar Das Market Scheme'. A plot measuring 13 ft. X 50 ft. = 650 sq. ft. belonging to the petitioner was also acquired for the said scheme. The petitioner claiming himself to be a local displaced person under rules known as 'the Utilisation of Land and Allotment of Plots by Improvement Trust Rules, 1975' applied to the Trust for allotment of a site in lieu of the land acquired for the Trust by the Government. The Trust vide its resolution dated July 25, 1977 (copy at Annexure P. 1), accorded sanction for allotment of commercial plots to 12 persons, including the petitioner, Vide letter dated June 27, 1980, the Chairman of the Trust informed the petitioner that he had been allotted Plot No. 179, measuring 15. 5. Sq. Yds. at the rate of Rs. 290/- per square yard to the Shri Guru Amardas Market Scheme. In accordance with the terms of this allotment, the petitioner deposited Rs. 4350/- by the stipulated date and also deposited another sum of Rs. 300/- towards security. It is the case of the petitioner that the Trust failed to deliver the possession of the allotted plot despite many representations to that effect. It has further been averred in the petition that the petitioner was verbally informed somewhere in October, 1982 that the Trust was unable to give possession and demarcation of Plot No. 179 since no such plot existed at the spot in the duly approved plan. The petitioner was further asked to submit another application for allotment of an alternative site. The petitioner is stated to have moved an application on 18. 10. 1982 requesting the Trust to allot some commercial plot to the petitioner in lieu of Plot No. 179 of which the possession had not been delivered to him.

(2.) IN response to the aforesaid application of the petitioner, the Trust vide its resolution of 154, dated March 30, 1983, decided to allot Booth No. 12, measuring 31. 06 Sq. Yds. in the Narotam Nagar Development Scheme of the Trust at the rate of Rs. 250/- per square yard and accoringly the petitioner was informed vide letter dated April 19, 1983. The petitioner was directed to deposit the balance amount of the total cost of the booth within 15 days of the receipt of the letter. The petitioner deposited the balance amount within the stipulated period and also another sum of Rs. 200/- towards security.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is admittedly a displaced person under the 1975 Rules and was entitled to allotment of a commercial site in lieu of the acquisition of his land and in fact along with many other similarly situated persons had been allotted a commercial site. The other displaced persons, to whom the commercial sites were allotted, were not only delivered possession of the same, but they were also allowed to construct their own shops/building thereon and no action was taken by the Government against the Trust or those allottees for having been allotted the commercial sites. No reason is forthcoming as to why commercial site could not be allotted to the petitioner, the resolution of the Trust allotting commercial site to the petitioner could not have been suspended by the Government. The action of the Government is arbitrary and discriminatory. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a judgment of this Court in CWP No. 2214 of 1985, decided on February 8, 1994 (Jagdish Rai v. State of Punjab and Anr.), (1994-3)108 P. L. R. 508.