Judgment Hemant Gupta, J. 1. This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3259, 3260 and 3261 of 1986 as all the three writ petitions raise common question of law and facts. 2. For the facility of reference the facts are taken from the records of C.W.P. No. 3259 of 1985. 3. The land of the petitioner measuring 4000 square yards was acquired under the scheme of Model Town Extension Part II by the Ludhiana Improvement Trust vide notification No. 2578-CI-74/17842 dated 17.7.1974, under Section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) earlier called Ludhiana Improvement Trust Land Disposal Rules, 1964 were framed. Subsequently these have been superseded with "The Utilisation of Land and Allotment of Plots by Improvement Trust Rules, 1975 " (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), wherein a local displaced person is the one who is owner of the land acquired for the execution of any scheme under the Act and who has been such owner for a continuous period of 2 years immediately before the first publication of such scheme under Section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922. The petitioner claimed that he is a local displaced person as defined under Rule 2(b) of the aforesaid Rules. 3. He is owner of the land acquired for a continuous period of 2 years immediately before the first publication of the scheme. The petitioner has also challenged the allotment of plot to respondent No. 3. The Ludhiana Model Cooperative House Building Society Limited Ludhiana as violative on the ground that such allotment is violative of the Rules. 4. The respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 have filed written statement wherein it has been stated that the members of respondent No. 3 Society are local displaced persons and were entitled for the plots. Since the policy of the Government is to encourage Housing Societies, therefore, the plot was allotted to members of the Society who otherwise, are local displaced persons. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner in the present writ petition in view of above has not challenged the allotment of plot to the said Co-operative Society but confined the claim of the petitioner for allotment of the plot to the petitioner in terms of 1975 Rules. 6. The Improvement Trust has not filed any reply to the written statement to controvert the claim of the petitioner. 6. The Improvement Trust has not filed any reply to the written statement to controvert the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner has relied upon the communication dated 19.8.1978, Annexure P3, wherein it was communicated by the Improvement Trust that it has been decided to allot plots to the Local Displaced Persons of the sizes and the rates mentioned therein. 7. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of such communication, the petitioner has not been allotted plot. His land was acquired way back in 1974. Communication was made in the year 1978 to the effect that the respondent Improvement Trust has decided to allot plot to the local displaced persons but still the respondents have not decided the claim of the petitioner for allotment of plot. 8. In view of the above facts, I am of the opinion that the claim of the petitioner for allotment of a plot is required to be considered by the Improvement Trust. The Improvement Trust is therefore, directed to decide the claim of the petitioner for allotment of plot in terms of the Rules within a period of 3 months from the date a certified copy of the order is supplied to the respondents. In case the plot is not to be allotted to the petitioner, the Improvement Trust shall communicate the reasons thereof so as to apprise the petitioner the reasons of not allotting the plot so that the petitioner may avail his remedy in accordance with the law. Disposed of in above terms.