Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 708 (PNJ)

Prithvi Saini 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 petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No. 2 to 4 to make allotment of plot in Sectors 11-12, Panipat in lieu of their acquired land against the advertisement dated 6.2.2017 against which the petitioner had not applied as the amount of 10% and further huge cost was demanded by the respondents. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to charge the rate of allotment from the petitioners as applicable in the year 2016-17 in Sector 25 Part II, Panipat and that too on the basis of the applications invited in the year 2011 from the oustees of the said sector and not of the year 2016-17 as shown in the advertisement dated 6.2.2017 of Sector 12, Panipat. 2. The petitioners along with other co-sharers were owners of the land measuring 16 kanals to the extent of their shares situated within the revenue estate of village Patti Taraf Afgan. Government of Haryana acquired the said land for the development and utilization of residential/commercial and industrial Sector 11-12, Panipat and the award was passed on 14.2.1979. A policy dated 10.9.1987 (Annexure P-1) was framed by the Government of Haryana for the allotment of residential plots/commercial sites to the oustees which was amended from time to time vide policies dated 9.5.1990, 18.3.1992 and 12.3.1993 (Annexure P-2 to P-4, respectively). Further, the Government of Haryana framed a policy for the allotment of plot under oustees quota in view of the judgment dated 3.1.2011 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Supreme Court. Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) vide advertisements dated 30.11.2011 and 8.11.2011 (Annexures P-6 and P-7, respectively) invited applications for the allotment of residential plots from the oustees/landowners whose land was acquired for the development of various sectors in Panipat. The HUDA made allotment of plots in Sector 12, Panipat to the landowners at the rate of Rs. 16,600/- per square meter. Thereafter, the HUDA framed another policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-8) and as per the said policy, all the co-sharers were entitled to the allotment of separate plots according to their share in the acquired land. The HUDA conducted the draw of lots on 17.3.2016 and issued the allotment letter dated 28.10.2016 (Annexure P-9) to the oustees concerned. Thereafter, the HUDA framed another policy dated 11.8.2016 (Annexure P-8) and as per the said policy, all the co-sharers were entitled to the allotment of separate plots according to their share in the acquired land. The HUDA conducted the draw of lots on 17.3.2016 and issued the allotment letter dated 28.10.2016 (Annexure P-9) to the oustees concerned. The HUDA vide advertisement dated 6.2.2017 (Annexure P-10) invited applications from the landowners whose land was acquired for the development of Sector 12, Panipat mentioning the rates for allotment of plot of 10 marla at Rs. 1,21,22,000/- and the applicant was to deposit an amount of Rs. 12,12,200/- (i.e. 10% of the total tentative cost of the plot). The said amount was to be deposited within 120 days from the date of draw of lots. The petitioners were entitled to the allotment of a 10 marla plot but they did not apply in pursuance to the advertisement, Annexure P-10, as the amount demanded by the respondents was on higher side. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted 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.