Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1061 (PNJ)

Dindayal v. State of Haryana

2018-02-27

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL

body2018
JUDGMENT : AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-20). Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for the allotment of plots in lieu of acquisition of the land. 2. The petitioners were co-owners of the land measuring 8 kanal 19 marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Rewari, Tehsil and District Rewari. State of Haryana vide notification dated 23.1.1990 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Act”) followed by a notification dated 22.1.1991 under Section 6 of the Act acquired the said land for the development and utilization of land as residential and commercial Sector 3 Part, Rewari. The award was passed on 25.3.1992 (Annexure P-1). The petitioners filed CWP-15235-2015 and this Court vide order dated 28.7.2015 (Annexure P-2) disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. The respondents invited applications for the allotment of plots under oustee quota. In response thereto, the petitioners submitted the applications (Annexures P-3 to P-10, respectively) along with bank draft of Rs. 50,000/- each vide receipts dated 29.7.2015 (Annexures P- 11 to P-18, respectively). The respondents framed a policy dated 9.5.1990 for the allotment of a plot under the oustees quota. The said policy has been amended vide policies dated 18.3.1992, 7.12.2007 (Annexure P-19) and 9.11.2010. Respondent No.3 advised the petitioners 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. In this regard, the respondents also framed a policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-20). Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioners 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. 4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioners 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. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation raising all the pleas as raised in the present writ petition before the appropriate authority. It is directed that in the event of a representation being filed by the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioners shall be entitled to lead any evidence to substantiate their claim before the concerned authority.