Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 699 (PNJ)

Surinder Singh v. State of Haryana

2018-02-15

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL

body2018
JUDGMENT : AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allot a plot to the petitioner in lieu of acquisition of land under the oustees quota. Further, a writ of certiorari has been sought for quashing the instructions dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-7) issued by respondent No. 2. 2. The petitioner was owner of the land measuring 1 kanal 15 marla situated within the revenue estate of village Nawadafatehpur, Tehsil Manesar, District Gurgaon as per the jamabandi for the year 2011-12 (Annexure P-1). The said land was acquired by the Government of Haryana vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Act”) followed by a notification dated 19.5.2010 under Section 6 of the Act for floating Sectors 81 to 95, Gurgaon. The award was passed on 14.6.2010. A notice dated 2.4.2010 (Annexure P-2) was issued under Section 9 of the Act. The petitioner sent a letter dated 23.10.2013 (Annexure P-3) along with the draft dated 22.10.2013 (Annexure P-4) amounting to Rs. 50,000/- to respondent No. 4 for the allotment of a plot under the oustees quota. The respondents framed a policy dated 18.3.1992 (Annexure P-5). The said policy was amended vide policies dated 12.3.1993 (Annexure P-6) and dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-7) for the allotment of a plot to the oustees. However, no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner had sent the letter dated 23.10.2013 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No. 4, but no action has so far been taken thereon. He, however, prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioner 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. He, however, prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the representation. The petitioner shall be entitled to lead any evidence to substantiate his claim before the concerned authority.