Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1064 (PNJ)

Basti Ram 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 letters dated 28.9.2016 (Annexure P-7), 4.10.2016 (Annexure P-8) and the Policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-9) vide which it was decided to refund the cheque amount deposited by the petitioners under oustee quota for the allotment of a plot. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for the allotment of plot in lieu of acquisition of the land. 2. The petitioners were owner in possession of the land measuring 5 marla situated within the revenue estate of village Dhaliawas, Tehsil and District Rewari. State of Haryana vide notification dated 27.1.2003 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Act”) followed by a notification dated 23.1.2004 under Section 6 of the Act acquired the said land for the public purpose and utilization of land for residential, commercial Sectors 18, 19 and 20 Part at Rewari. The award was passed on 20.1.2006 (Annexure P-1). The respondents invited applications for the allotment of plots under oustee quota. In response thereto, the petitioners submitted the applications along with bank draft of Rs. 50,000/- each vide receipts dated 31.10.2013 (Annexures P-2 and P-3, respectively). The petitioners submitted another application dated 22.7.2015 (Annexure P-4) along with affidavit dated 14.7.2015 (Annexure P-5) for the allotment of plots under the oustee quota. 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-6) and 9.11.2010. Respondent No.3 vide letters dated 28.9.2016 (Annexure P-7) and 4.10.2016 (Annexure P-8) 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-9). Hence, the present writ petition. 3. In this regard, the respondents also framed a policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-9). 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. 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.