Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BALBIR SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORSTHRO

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Balbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Orsthro - CWP-19447-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 12304 (8 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP NO.19447 of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: December 8, 2006

Balbir Singh

....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

....

Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA

PRESENT: Shri S.P.Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).

Notice of motion to the respondents.

On the asking of Court, Shri Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Copies of the writ petition have been supplied to the learned counsel for the respondents.

The claim of the petitioner for allotment of a plot as an oustee has been rejected by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Panchkula through a communication (Annexure P.6) dated December 1, 2006. It has been reported that since the acquired land of the petitioner fell in Sectors 2 and 20 and he had applied for allotment of plot in Sector 27, therefore, he could not be treated as eligible for the allotment of the aforesaid plot in Sector 27. The petitioner has pleaded that in Sectors 2 and 20, no plots were available for the allotment to the oustee's

category, inasmuch as, the entire sectors were reserved for defence personnel/societies. On that basis, the petitioner has relied upon the policies of HUDA, whereby the plot could be allotted in adjacent or alternative sector.

On November 29,2006, the Chief Administrator, HUDA had appeared in this Court in CWP No.15433 of 2006 and another connected matters and had made a statement. A large number of cases were disposed of on the basis of the aforesaid statement made by the Chief Administrator.

The present petition is also disposed of in terms of the statement made by CWP No.15433 of 2006.

A copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.

(Viney Mittal)

Judge

December 8, 2006 (H.S. Bhalla)

KD Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.