Allowed

Raja Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Feb 2012CWP/19068/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashes an order rejecting the petitioner's claim for a Red Card and associated compensation as a 1984 riot victim. The Court held that the rejection was arbitrary given subsequent extensions of the deadline and remanded the matter for a fresh decision after affording a proper hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 17.9.2010 was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision.

Raja Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No.19068 of 2010

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

CWP No.19068 of 2010 Date of decision: 14.02.2012

Raja Singh

----- Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab and another

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

¶11

Present:Mr. Mansur Ali, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Jaswinder Singh,DAG, Punjab.

¶13

Ajay Kumar Mittal,J .

¶14

The petitioner who claims to be a victim of the unfortunate 1984 riots has prayed for quashing of the order dated 17.9.2010, Annexure P.11 and also instructions Annexure P.12 dated 27.12.2007 and letter Annexure P.13 dated 8.6.2010 being bad in law, through the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

¶15

Brief facts as narrated in the petition may be noticed. The petitioner and his family members are 1984 riot victims and are now settled in District Ropar. At the relevant time, they were living in Delhi. On account of attack on him and his family members, FIR dated 1.11.1984 Annexure P.1 was got registered at Delhi. Thereafter, various schemes were issued by the Government of India as well as State of Punjab to rehabilitate the victims of riots. A copy of the policy dated 16.1.2006 is attached as Annexure P.3. The State of

¶16

CWP No.19068 of 2010

¶17

¶18

Punjab issues a Red Card to such like victims and thereafter compensation of Rs.2 lacs is given by the Government. In pursuance of the policy, the petitioner submitted his application on 8.2.2010 alongwith all the necessary documents but the same was not considered on the ground of being submitted late. The petitioner also relied upon another latest policy decision of the State of Punjab dated 23.12.2009/4.1.2010, Annexure P.9 wherein no time-frame had been fixed. He even submitted a representation to respondent No.2, Annexure P.7 dated 23.4.2010 but till date, the petitioner has not been issued any Red Card by the authorities. The petitioner even filed CWP No.11421 of 2010 in this Court and a direction was given to respondent No.2 to decide the representation. The claim of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 17.9.2010, Annexure P.11 impugned herein. Hence this petition.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the policy Annexure P.9 for issuance of identity cards to the riot affected families, no time frame had been provided therein for submitting an application and, therefore, application filed by the petitioner on 8.2.2010 could not be rejected on the ground of delay. Attention was drawn to letter Annexure P.14 filed alongwith the replication wherein the respondents had extended the time upto 31.3.2011. Item 4 of the same which is relevant reads thus:-

¶20

“Regarding making of Red Cards of the Riot affected families.

¶21

It is stated by the President Shri Surjit Singh, Danga Peerat Welfare Society, Ludhiana that some families are still left for issuance of new Red Cards. He

¶22

CWP No.19068 of 2010

¶23

¶24

made a request to extend the date for making of red cards. In this regard Chief Secretary had issued instructions to Revenue Department to write a letter regarding extension of date till 31.3.2011 to Home Ministry of India, so that Identity cards to be issued to the persons who have still not been issued the red cards.”

¶25

Reference was also made to the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court dated 15.2.2011 in CWP No.18227 of 2010, Manjit Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, wherein it was noticed that in the affidavit of the Deputy Commissioner, it was clearly mentioned that the Red Cards were issued to the victims in the years 1986, 2001 and even in the year 2010. On the basis of the aforesaid premises, it was submitted that rejection of the application of the petitioner was illegal on the ground that the same was belated and was filed after the cut off date fixed by the Government. It was also submitted that the application which was rejected was without affording an opportunity and in FIR Annexure P.1, it was clearly stated that the petitioner was a victim of communal riots which took place in 1984. It was urged that in case an opportunity had been provided, the petitioner would have established that he was unfortunate victim of riots which broke out in the year 1984 and was entitled for various benefits which were provided to the said victims.

¶26

Learned State counsel, however, reiterated the submissions made in the written statement that the petitioner had not applied within time and his application had been rightly rejected

¶27

CWP No.19068 of 2010

¶28

¶29

being belated. However, on a query being put to him that in the light of latest policy Annexure P.14 and particularly the affidavit filed by the State in CWP No.18227 of 2010, wherein it was stated that Red Cards had been issued in the year 2010 after the cut off date as envisaged in earlier notification, no meaningful answer could be furnished by the counsel.

¶30

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, the order Annexure P.11 impugned herein is set aside and the matter is remanded to the concerned authority for taking fresh decision in accordance with law after affording a proper

¶31

opportunity to the petitioner.

¶32

February 14, 2012 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) ‘gs’ Judge

Raja Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Singh v. State of Punjab & 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

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rajan Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs U.H.B.V.N. and Ors.

Shree Siddhivinayak Educational Trust Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S Om Shanti Filling Station Vs Indian Oil Corp. Ltd. & Anr.

Ranjeet Singh and Ors. Vs Dy. Commr. Ambala and Ors.

Amarjit Sinh Dhaliwal Vs Union of India and Ors.