Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TARA CHAND versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Tara Chand v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-92-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4846 (27 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP NO.92 of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: July 28,2006

Tara Chand

....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

.....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

PRESENT: Shri Jai Vir Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Ashok Jindal, Addl.A.G., Haryana.

Shri Arun Walia, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).

The petitioner claims himself to be an oustee and as such claims the allotment of plot. The claim made by the petitioner has been rejected by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Gurgaon vide communication dated August 10,2004 whereby the petitioner has been intimated that he had not applied for allotment of plot under the oustee's category when the sector was floated.

From the perusal of the written statement, we find that the respondents have maintained that for the Sector 52 booking had commended with effect from October 14, 2002 and the petitioner had not applied at that point of time. Even the left out plots were re- advertised and the petitioner had not applied. However, from the perusal of the stand taken by the respondents, we are not satisfied that any public notice qua inviting the applications from the Oustees was issued by the Estate Officer at the time of floating the aforesaid sector.

In view of the aforesaid fact, we dispose of the present petition with a direction to the Estate Officer, HUDA, Gurgaon to reconsider the claim of the petitioner. For this purpose, the petitioner shall be required to file a detailed and comprehensive representation alongwith the requisite earnest money within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is received. All the relevant documents shall be appended with the said representation.

On receipt of the aforesaid representation, the Estate Officer, HUDA, Gurgaon shall consider the claim of the petitioner and pass a detailed and speaking order, in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of filing of the representation.

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

(Viney Mittal)

Judge

July 28, 2006 (A.N. Jindal)

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.