JUDGMENT Mr. Jasbir Singh, J.: (Oral) - This writ petition has been filed with a prayer that directions be issued to the respondents to allot one kanal plot to the petitioner in Bahadurgarh district Jhajjar against plots reserved for the Advocates. 2. It has come on record that the petitioner’s age is about 80 years and as per averments made in this petition, he is a practicing lawyer. It is also on record that the State of Haryana has reserved some plots for Advocates in ‘Medium Potential Zone’ towns i.e. Faridabad, Palwal, Hisar, Rohtak, Ambala and Kurukshetra to the extent of 5% in areas to be developed by HUDA etc. 3. For the Advocate to be eligible following are the conditions mentioned in advertisement vide which plots were put for allotment in Bahadurgarh (P1):- “a) The applicant must be a lawyer practicing in that Urban Estate where he or she applies for a plot. Further the applicant should be comprising that Urban Estate and registered with the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana for atleast one year on the date of submitting his or her application for the allotment of a plot under the policy. b) The applicant must be a permanent resident of Haryana. c) The applicant should not be having a plot or house in any Urban Estate of Haryana State or Chandigarh or Mohali in his or her own name or in the name of his or her spouse or dependent children or in the name of HUF comprising all or any one of them. d) Those advocates who have ever been allotted a plot or land out of Government servant Reserve Quota Discretionary Quota or any other reserved category at any time anywhere in Haryana shall not be eligible under this policy.” 4. It is specifically mentioned that the applicant should be registered with Punjab and Haryana Bar Council atleast for one year on the date of submitting his or her application for allotment of a plot. He/ she must be a permanent resident of Haryana. It is further specifically stated that the applicant should not be having a plot or house in any Urban Estate of Haryana State or Chandigarh or Mohali in his or her own name or in the name of his or her spouse or dependent children or in the name of HUF comprising all or any one of them. 5. It is further specifically stated that the applicant should not be having a plot or house in any Urban Estate of Haryana State or Chandigarh or Mohali in his or her own name or in the name of his or her spouse or dependent children or in the name of HUF comprising all or any one of them. 5. As per above advertisement, applications were to be received upto 5.1.2010. It is case of the petitioner that he submitted his application on 26.12.2009 for allotment of a plot. His application was not considered against plots reserved for the Advocates, rather the same was considered in general category. 6. Upon notice, reply has been filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 wherein it is stated that when submitting his application the petitioner had not attached copy of his enrollment certificate with the Bar Council. It is further stated that as per admission made by the petitioner, the certificate was issued by Bar Association at Bahadurgarh on 28.7.2010, whereas booking was closed on 5.1.2010. Draw of lots was conducted on 25.5.2010. In replication filed it is stated that the date of issuance of certificate was wrongly mentioned whereas as a matter of fact the certificate was issued on 11.12.2009. 7. Be that as it may, it is case of the respondents that requisite proof of practicing at Bahadurgarh was not submitted by the petitioner on account of which his application was rightly considered in the general category. Furthermore, as per averment made by the petitioner his age is 80 years. He is practicing since 1968. If that is so, it is not expected that he does not have any house in his name or in the name of his family members in the State of Haryana. The Policy appears to have been introduced to help the young Advocates and not the persons like the petitioner. 8. With above observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. ---------0.B.S.0------------