Disposed

Surender Kumar and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Oct 2016CWP/20880/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the failure to allot a plot under the oustee quota to petitioners whose land was acquired by the State. The Court did not express an opinion on merits but directed the respondent to take a decision on the petitioners' representation within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.3 to take a decision on the representation dated 21.5.2015 within three months by passing a speaking order after hearing.

Surender Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP No. 20880 of 2016

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 20880 of 2016

¶5

Date of Decision: 5.10.2016

¶6

Sh. Surender Kumar and others

¶7

....Petitioners.

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Haryana and others

¶10

...Respondents.

¶11

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN.

¶12

PRESENT: Mr. Sharad Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶14

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 the respondents to allot a plot to them as per the representation dated 21.5.2015 (Annexure P-3) under the oustee quota in view of the policy, Annexure P-2.

¶15

The petitioners were owners in possession of the land measuring 39 kanal 3 marlas situated within the revenue estate of Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani as per the jamabandi for the year 2004-05 (Annexure P-1). The said land was acquired by the State of Haryana vide notification dated 18.12.2008 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Act”) followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act for the development of Sector 10, Charkhi Dadri. As

¶16

per the policy dated 18.3.1992 (Annexure P-2), all the land owners whose Gurbachan Singh 2016.10.06 14:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CWP No. 20880 of 2016 -2-

¶18

land was acquired for the development by the HUDA, were entitled to the allotment of plot under the oustee quota. Accordingly, the petitioners sent a representation dated 21.5.2015 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.3 for the allotment of a plot under oustees quota, but no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioners have sent a representation dated 21.5.2015 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.3, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

¶20

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by directing respondent No.3 to take a decision on the representation dated 21.5.2015 (Annexure P-3), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶21

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

¶22

October 5, 2016 (RAMENDRA JAIN) gbs JUDGE

¶23

Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶24

Gurbachan Singh 2016.10.06 14:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Surender Kumar and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surender Kumar and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Summer and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Joginder Singh Rataul Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Narinder Kaur Vs Board of Directors of State Bank of India and Ors.

Chander Shekhar Vs Estate Officer, U.T. Chandigarh and Anr.

Malwa Industries Ltd. Vs Canara Bank and Ors.

Residents Welfare Association Vs State of Haryana & Ors.