HEM RAJ GUPTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is for placing on record affidavit of respondent No.3. Application is allowed and affidavit of respondent No.3, annexed with the application, is taken on record.

(2.) The prayer in the present petition is for quashing of impugned order dated 12.02.2014 (Annexure P-17), whereby claim of the petitioner for an alternative plot has been rejected. A further prayer has also been made for issuance of direction to the respondents either to exempt the house possessed by the petitioner in Inder Nagar Colony, Patiala from the scheme known as Shaheed Sewa Singh Thikriwala Nagar Scheme or to allot an alternative plot in the said scheme and pay the compensation for the structure in view of judgment passed in CWP No.175 of 1991 titled as Rajinder Kumar Sharma and others Vs. State of Punjab and others decided on 01.02.1995.

(3.) Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that the petitioner purchased one plot No. 49 measuring 400 square yards in Sunder Nagar Colony vide registered sale deed dated 29.06.1970 and got the mutation entered/sanctioned in his favour. He also raised construction over said plot. Said plot was acquired by the Improvement Trust under Shaheed Sewa Singh Thikriwala Nagar Scheme. Petitioner made request for exemption from the scheme for which the plot was acquired or to allot an alterative plot to him. He also requested for payment of compensation but his request was not accepted. The State of Punjab in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 41 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 sanctioned the development scheme prepared by the Patiala Improvement Trust vide notification dated 30.12.1973. Said scheme was silent regarding adjustment of plots/houses. Petitioner approached this Court by way of filing CWP No.4244 of 2011, which was disposed of on 19.03.2011 with the direction to the Chairman of Improvement Trust, Patiala to treat the writ petition as representation of the petitioner and to consider it in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. In pursuance of the said direction, the claim of the petitioner was considered but it was filed. The petitioner was also informed to take compensation, due to him in respect of his plot, from the Land Acquisition Collector, Improvement Trust, Patiala on the basis of order passed in CWP No.4244 of 2011. Thereafter, the petitioner again filed CWP No.936 of 2012 for quashing of communication dated 17.08.2011, whereby his claim for exemption of his plot from acquisition or to allot an alternative plot in lieu thereof was turned down. The petitioner also relied upon decision dated 15.01.2010 passed in CWP No.15852 of 2009 titled as Balbir Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others. While disposing of said petition, a direction was issued to determine/consider the claim of the petitioner for adjustment of his plot as per the scheme or to allot an alternative plot. Order dated 17.08.2011 impugned in that petition was also set aside with the direction to the Chairman of the respondent-Trust to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for allotment of alterative plot. The claim was declined vide order dated 12.02.2014 on the ground that applications were invited under Local Displaced Persons Scheme but no such application was submitted by the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner did not fall in said scheme as the petitioner did not fulfil the terms and conditions of the scheme and he was not found entitled for said scheme. However, while declining the claim of the petitioner, it was mentioned that the Trust has filed an appeal before the Apex Court and further action shall be taken as per decision given therein. Petitioner had to file the present petition being aggrieved by the decision of the Improvement Trust.