Allowed

Hisar Ex. Naval Personnel Welfare Society v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Jan 2012CWP/14874/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed a writ petition challenging the HUDA's practice of classifying allotment of residential plots for ex-servicemen based on their military rank. Relying on a prior Division Bench judgment, the Court set aside the classification as unreasonable discrimination and ordered the eligibility criteria based on rank to be quashed.

What did the court decide?

The eligibility criteria for allotment of a plot dependent upon rank held by an applicant are set aside and the petition is allowed.

Hisar Ex. Naval Personnel Welfare Society Vs… — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No.14874 of 2007

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.14874 of 2007 Date of decision : 19.01.2012

¶5

The Hisar Ex. Naval Personnel Welfare Society, 88, Defence Colony, Hisar

¶6

....PETITIONER(S)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Haryana and another

¶9

....RESPONDENT(S)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

¶11

Present : Mr.Vivek Khatri, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.Ajay Nara, Advocate, for the respondents.

¶13

HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral)

¶14

Challenge in the present writ petition is for quashing of the conditions mentioned in the application form that the former ex-servicemen shall be entitled to apply for a plot keeping in view the rank, which they held while in active service.

¶15

An advertisement was published by Haryana Urban Development Authority (for short 'the HUDA') inviting applications for allotment of residential plots in Sector – 6, Jhajjar. The application form, containing the eligibility criteria, contemplated that the applications are to be submitted in relation to the rank held by the applicants. The eligibility criteria, as mentioned in Annexure P-2, is as under:

¶16

(i)Officers of the rank of Colonel and above and equivalent rank of Navy and Air Force/Para Military Forces eligible to apply for one kanal plot only.

¶17

CWP No.14874 of 2007

¶18

¶19

(ii)Other Commissioner Officers upto Lt. Col. And equivalent rank are eligible for 14 marla and 10 marla plot only.

¶20

(iii)JCOs/ equivalent and other ranks are ligible for plots of 8, 6 & 4 marla.”

¶21

The grievance of the petitioner is that the classification to submit an application for allotment of a particular size of a plot, based upon the rank held by the applicant at one point of time, is without any reasonable nexus with the objective to be achieved and consequently, unsustainable.

¶22

Similar grievance was raised in CWP No.16064 of 2004 titled “ Prem Singh Vs. HUDA & another ”. A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.07.2006 set aside such classification. It was observed as under:

¶23

“After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the grievance made by the petitioner is wholly justified. In the Information Brochure or even in the written statement, no justification has been offered by the respondents as to why there was any such subdivision/classification amongst the decree personnel/ex-servicemen etc. As a matter of fact, in our considered view, the aforesaid classification amounts to discrimination amongst the persons who have ex-service background and as such have been granted reservation.

¶24

Consequently, we quash the order (Annexure P-4) and the plot in question which had been allotted to the petitioner shall stand restored back to him. Of course, the petitioner shall be required to deposit the remaining amount due from him, as per terms and conditions of the allotment.”

¶25

The HUDA filed a Special Leave Petition against the said order, which has been dismissed on 29.11.2010, when the following order was passed:

¶26

“The special leave petition is dismissed. However, the question of law is kept open.”

¶27

CWP No.14874 of 2007

¶28

¶29

Earlier the hearing of the present petition was adjourned sine die to await the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. But now, it has been pointed out that the Special Leave Petition has been dismissed, therefore, the present writ petition is taken up for hearing.

¶30

A Division Bench of this Court in Prem Singh's case (supra) has found that the classification for allotment of a plot, based upon the rank of an Officer, is unreasonable. Such finding is binding on the present Division Bench. Therefore, this Court cannot re-examine the question of legality of classification.

¶31

Consequently, the present writ petition is allowed. The eligibility criteria for allotment of a plot, dependent upon rank held by an applicant, cannot be sustained and is set aside.

¶32

Mr. Vivek Khatri, learned counsel representing the petitioner, points out that writ petitions bearing CWP Nos.18393 of 2008, 5576 of 2009, 2021 of 2010, 21297 of 2010, 21298 of 2010, 21299 of 2010 and 2510 of 2011 raising similar question, are also pending before this Court.

¶33

The Registry is directed to list all the aforementioned writ petiitons on 01.02.2012.

¶34

(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE

¶35

(A.N.JINDAL) JUDGE

¶36

19.01.2012 MAMTA/vimal

Hisar Ex. Naval Personnel Welfare Society v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hisar Ex. Naval Personnel Welfare Society v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepan Garg Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Noordeen & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Subhash Chand Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Shinder Singh and Ors. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Ors.

Jai Bhagwan Vs Haryana Urban Development Authority and Anr.

Ram Avad Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Ors.