LAWS(P&H)-2018-4-35

ANGURI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

Decided On April 05, 2018
ANGURI DEVI Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Others Respondents

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 certiorari for quashing the policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-5) and the letter dated 7.10.2016 (Annexure P-6). Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to allot a plot to the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner was owner of the land measuring 6 kanal 5 marlas situated within the revenue estate of Jind as per the jamabandi for the year 2009-10 (Annexure P-1). The said land was acquired by the respondents for the development of Sectors 6 to 9, Jind vide award dated 6.9.2005. The respondents vide advertisement dated 29.2013 (Annexure P-2) invited the applications from the landowners whose land had been acquired for the allotment of plots under the oustees quota. In response thereto, the petitioner applied for the allotment of a plot vide application dated 21.10.2013 (Annexure P-3) along with earnest money of Rs. 50,000/- vide draft dated 17.10.2013 (Annexure P-4). A policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-5) was framed by the HUDA wherein it was advised to the landowners to apply for allotment of plot in fresh advertisement which would be issued after determination of reservation and the earnest money would be refunded along with interest. On the basis thereof, respondent No.3 vide letter dated 7.10.2016 (Annexure P-6) advised the petitioner to apply for the allotment of plot in fresh advertisement to be issued in future inviting the claims from the oustees as per reservation in Sectors 6 to 9, HUDA, Jind. 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 vs. 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.