Allowed

Ajit Pal Singh Mander v. Punjab Urban Development Authority & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Sept 2015CWP/20183/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought preferential allotment over successful grand-children in the freedom-fighter category for residential plots. Court directed surrender of allotments by respondents to grant plot on same terms to petitioner without forfeiture losses.

What did the court decide?

Allot one plot to petitioner at same rate/terms if respondents surrender; direct proper handling of waiting list to avoid forfeiture.

Ajit Pal Singh Mander Vs Punjab… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.20183 of 2012 Date of Decision: September 23, 2015

¶3

Ajit Pal Singh Mander

¶4

.....Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

Punjab Urban Development Authority and others

¶7

......Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶9

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

¶10

Present: Mr.P.S.Jammu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.HPS Ghuman, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr.Y.P.Singla, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr.Onkar Singh, Advocate, and Mr.Gurbir Singh Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No.4. Mr.K.K.Gupta, Additional AG, Punjab.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

The petitioner is admittedly son of a freedom-

¶18

fighter. He applied for allotment of residential plot in response

¶19

to the advertisement issued by the Bathinda Development Authority.

¶20

[2] As per the Information Brochure, 2% plots were

¶21

reserved for freedom-fighters which included (i) freedomfighter himself; (ii) widow of the freedom-fighter who is drawing pension, and (iii) freedom-fighter's son/daughter and

¶22

grand-son/grand-daughter.

¶23

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.10.12 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶24

CWP No.20183 of 2012

¶25

[2]

¶26

[3] It so happened in the draw of lots that respondent Nos.3 & 4, who are grand-children of freedom-fighters were successful and have been allotted the plots. The petitioner did not succeed. He has now approached this Court, inter-alia, claiming that a freedom-fighter's son ought to have been given preference over the grand-son/grand-daughter of a freedom-fighter.

¶27

[4] The above-stated issue raised by the petitioner need not be gone into for the reason that both respondent Nos.3 & 4 through their learned counsel state at the bar that they are not willing to retain the allotted plots and are ready to surrender the same.

¶28

[5] No other eligible candidate in the freedomfighter's category has come forward to seek allotment. In these circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction that in case respondent Nos.3 & 4 surrender their plots, the Bathinda Development Authority shall not forfeit any amount and allot one of the plot to the petitioner at the same rate and on the same terms and conditions. It will ensure that the Bathinda Development Authority does not suffer any loss and at the same time, the petitioner gets the plot reserved for freedom-fighter category. It will further ensure that respondent Nos.3 & 4 also do not suffer any loss. We further

¶29

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.10.12 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶30

CWP No.20183 of 2012 [3]

¶31

direct that if anyone in the waiting list in the General Category or otherwise is willing for allotment of the plot, let the left-out

¶32

plot be allotted to such person(s) in waiting list so that there

¶33

is no forfeiture against the second plot as well.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT]

JUDGE

September 23, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

¶39

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.10.12 14:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Ajit Pal Singh Mander v. Punjab Urban Development Authority & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Pal Singh Mander v. Punjab Urban Development Authority & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Sharma Fruit Company Bhawanigarh and Ors. Vs Administrator New Mandi Township Punjab and Ors.

Baldev Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Kabaj Ram Gorsi and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rajener Gujjar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Charan Singh & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Poonam Rani Vs State Election Commission Haryana and Ors.