Ashwani Kumar and Others Vs Navraj Sandhu IAS and Another

Smt. Navraj Sandhu, IAS, Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Haryana and Financial Commissioner, Revenue & Disaster Management and Consolidation Department, New Haryana Civil Secretariat, Sec.17, Chandigarh and another

¶10

…..Respondents

¶11

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶12

Present:Mr. B.R. Rana, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. A. G ., Haryana for respondents No.1, 2 and 5.

¶14

Ms. Eliza Gupta, Advocate wi t h Mr. Sahil Shehrawat, Advocat e for the interveners/respondent s No.3 and 4.

¶15

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

¶16

Present contempt petition has b een filed alleging violation of order dat e d 25.9.2018 (Annexure P-1) pas s ed by a predecessor Bench of this Cour t in CWP-25443-2013 titled as “ A shwani Kumar and others vs. State of H aryana and others”, whereby th e same was allowed with the following observations :-

¶17

“….The petitioners a r e also claiming alternative allotment, which is th e prayer made in the present case also and the said issue shall also be gone into. Since it is an old case, it is expected that the authorities shall make e arnest efforts to dispose of the

¶18

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

2

¶20

COCP-3049-2019 (O & M)

¶21

issue within a period o f 6 months from the receipt of the certified copy of thi s order.” In compliance of the last orde r dated 10.11.2025, respondent

¶22

No.5 is pr e sent in person in Court.

¶23

Learned counsel for the pet i tioners submits that in noncomplian c e of the abovesaid direction, the p lots have not yet been allotted to the peti t ioners.

¶24

Learned counsel for the res p ondents No.1, 2 and 5/State refers to t h e Compliance Report dated 20.11.2025 filed by way of affidavit of Shri L achhi Ram, Naib Tehsildar ( M ), Additional Charge, Naib Tehsildar Sales, Narnaul, District Mahe n dergarh-respondent No.5; in particular to Annexure R-3, which is an or d er dated 21.1.2020 passed by the Tehsil d ar (Sale) Narnaul to submit that t he allotment of plots No.1081 and 1082 situated in Narnaul, District M a hendergarh, was made to the father of the petitioners in the year 1961. It is submitted that the said allotment, on the face of it, was an inadvert e nt error as the said plots have already b e en sold by its owner i.e. the C e ntral Government to one Shri Sunder Si n gh s/o Shri Gian Chand on 07.11.1958. It is submitted that in respect of plot No.1301 as is clarified in An n exure R-4, the said plot is not traceable a s in the subsequent changes that t ook place on the spot, in place of the sai d plot, a plot No.1299 exists, the boundaries of which, matched with the o r iginal plot stated to be 1301.

¶25

At this stage, learned counsel for the interveners/respondents No.3 and 4 , who are the allottees of plot No . 1299 submits that the said plot No.1299 w as allotted to the predecessors-i n -interest of respondents No.3 and 4 on dated 11.9.1957. It is also di s puted by learned counsel for responde n ts No.3 and 4 that the boundaries of plots No.1301 and 1299 are matching.

¶26

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶27

3

¶28

COCP-3049-2019 (O & M)

¶29

It is accordingly submitted b y both learned counsel for the responde n ts that even prior to the allotm e nt to the predecessors of the petitioner s in the year 1961, the plots in qu e stion already stood allotted to other pers o ns.

¶30

It is also to be noted that aga i nst the allotment of 1961, the petitioner s had approached the revenue aut h orities on dated 04.4.2001 i.e. after a pe r iod of 40 years, whereupon their a p plication dated 04.4.2001 was dismissed by the Deputy Tehsildar (Sales) o n dated 21.6.2001. On several Court que r ies to the petitioners as to why t h ere was a delay of 40 years in approachi n g the concerned authorities, lear n ed counsel for the petitioners submits t h at during these 40 years, he w a s approaching the concerned authoritie s . However, nothing has been placed on record to show that the petitioner s were proceeding with their cas e in the intervening 40 years. After the d ismissal of their application by t h e Deputy Tehsildar (Sale) vide order date d 21.6.2001, the petitioners had fil e d Case Nos.21, 22, 23 of 2002 under Sec t ion 33 before the Financial Com m issioner, which was dismissed on 03.6.2002. The revision filed by th e petitioners before the Chief Settlemen t Commissioner was also dismisse d on 30.9.2002. Thereafter the petitioner s had approached this Court after 11 years; by way of instant Civil Writ Petit i on No.25443 of 2013, thereby lay i ng challenge to the order dated 30.9.2002 passed by the Chief Settlement C o mmissioner.

¶31

Notwithstanding the delay of the petitioners in pursuing the case, the Writ Court direction is also ve r y clear; inasmuch it is only directed t h at the case of the petitioners be c o nsidered afresh and alternative allotment t o the petitioners be also considered.

¶32

Learned counsel for the S tate, on instructions from responde n t No.5 who is present in person, submits that alternative plots No.1081 a nd 1082, each measuring 169 s q uare yards situated in Khasra

¶33

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶34

4

¶35

COCP-3049-2019 (O & M)

¶36

No.2352, already stand allotted to the petitioners vide order dated 21.01.202 0 (Annexure R-3). However, t h e petitioners are themselves refusing t o take possession of the said plots. It is further submitted that with regard to t he issue of plot No.1301, the res p ondents are ready and willing to provid e an alternative plot of the same m e asurement in the same Khasra number a n d that the matter is actively under consideration.

¶37

Having noted the above said f a cts, which are not disputed by learned c o unsel for the petitioners, the pr e sent contempt petition stands

¶38

dismissed.

¶39

Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed of.

¶40

Novembe r 29, 2025 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) Vijay Asija JUDGE

¶41

Whether s p eaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether R e portable Yes / No

¶42

VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ashwani Kumar and Others v. Navraj Sandhu IAS and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwani Kumar and Others v. Navraj Sandhu IAS and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohinder Singh Vs Gurudwara Singh Sabha

Ajit Jain Vs Sumit Parsad Jain and Others

Bishamber Vs M/S the New India Assurance Comp Ltd. and Ors.

Narender Singh Vs Davender

Jogender Vs Sunita & Anr.

Kulwant Kaur Vs Kuljinder Kaur