NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No. 3 to make allotment of plot for which the petitioner had applied vide application dated 8.2.2017 (Annexure P-9) in view of advertisement dated 16.1.2017 (Annexure P-8) by including the remaining left out vacant plots in Sector 25, Part II, Panipat as is discernible from the information dated 6.3.2017 (Annexure P-11) received under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short "the 2005 Act") at the same rates as applicable to the oustees of draw of lots dated 17.3.2016.

(2.) The petitioner along with other co-sharers was owner of the land measuring 42 kanal 6 marlas to the extent of his share situated within the revenue estate of village Patti Taraf Afgan, Tehsil and District Panipat as per the jamabandi for the year 2014-15 (Annexure P-1). Government of Haryana framed a policy dated 10.9.1987 (Annexure P-2) for the allotment of residential plots/commercial sites to the oustees whose land was compulsorily acquired by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA). The said policy was amended from time to time vide policies dated 9.5.1990, 18.3.1992 and 12.3.1993 (Annexures P-3 to P-5, respectively). Government of Haryana acquired the said land for the development of Sector 25, Part II, Panipat. The HUDA vide advertisement dated 16.1.2017 (Annexure P-8) invited applications for the allotment of residential plots from the oustees/landowners whose land was acquired for the development of Sector 25, Part II, Panipat. A bunch of 33 cases was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 4.4.2016 (Annexure P-6) passed in CWP-6684-2014 by directing the respondents to consider the claim of each and every co-sharer for the allotment of plot under the oustees quota. Thereafter, the HUDA framed another policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P- 7) and as per the said policy, all the co-sharers were entitled to the allotment of separate plots according to their share in the acquired land. In pursuance to the said policy, the HUDA invited applications from the oustees whose land was acquired for the development of Sector 25, Part II, Panipat and from the oustees of adjoining sectors vide advertisement dated 16.1.2017 (Annexure P-8). The petitioner vide application dated 8.2.2017 (Annexure P-9) applied for a 14-Marla plot under oustees quota by depositing 10% amount. One Shri Vijay Kumar who applied for the allotment of a plot under the oustees quota in the same sector, moved an application, Annexure P-10, under the 2005 Act for the status of vacant plots in Sector 25, Part II, Panipat after the auction held by the respondents. A reply dated 6.3.2017 (Annexure P-11) was received by said Shri Vijay Kumar that still there were number of plots of various sizes lying vacant in the said sector. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner has moved an application dated 8.2.2017 (Annexure P-9) to the respondents, but no action has so far been taken thereon. He, however, prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioner to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority by incorporating the grievance as raised in the present writ petition and direction be issued to the authority concerned to decide the representation expeditiously in a time bound manner in accordance with law.