BALRAJ SINGH 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 the respondents to make allotment of 1 kanal plot in Sector 12 or Sector 25, Part II, Panipat for which the petitioner had applied in lieu of advertisements dated 16.1.2017 and 6.2.2017 (Annexures P-7 and P-9, respectively) vide applications (Annexures P-8 and P-10, respectively); to conduct the draw of lots within 30 days from the last date of submission of application form by including the name of the petitioner as per policy dated 11.8.2016 and to charge the rate of allotment as applicable in the year 2011 and not of the year 2016-17 as demanded vide advertisements (Annexures P-7 and P-9, respectively).

(2.) The petitioner was owner of the land measuring 22 kanal 4 marlas to the extent of his share situated within the revenue estate of village Sewah, Tehsil and District Panipat as per the oustee certificate dated 14.Z.ZU1/(Annexure F-l). Government of Haryana framed the policies dated 10.9.1987 and 28.8.1998 (Annexures. P-2 and P-3, respectively) for the allotment of residential plots/commercial sites to the oustees whose land was compulsorily acquired by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA). Government of Haryana acquired the said land for the development of Sector 29, Part II (Industrial), Panipat vide award dated 11.4.2000. Government of Haryana framed a policy for the allotment of plot under oustees quota on the basis. of the directions issued by the Supreme Court vide order dated 3.1.2011 (Annexure P-4). The HUDA framed another policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-5) 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. On the basis of the said policy, the HUDA conducted the draw of lots on 17.3.2016 and issued allotment letters including the allotment letter dated 28.10.2016 (Annexure P-6). Further, in pursuance to the policy, Annexure P-5, the HUDA invited applications from the oustees whose land was acquired for the development of Sector 25, Part II and Sector 12, Panipat and from the oustees of adjoining sectors vide advertisements dated 16.1.2017 (Annexure P-7) and dated 6.2.2017 (Annexure P-9). The petitioner applied for the allotment of 1 kanal plot in Sector 12, Panipat vide applications (Annexures P-8 and P-10, respectively). Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the Full Bench judgment of this Court in CWP-22252-2016 (Rajiv Manchanda and others v. Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula and others)decided on 22.11.2017 , the matter is required to be revisited by the authorities. Accordingly, it was 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.