High CourtsDivision Bench(2018) 03 P&H CK 0098

Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Anr

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 7 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J · Anupinder Singh Grewal, J
RESULT
Disposed off
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 5474 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 349 words
1.

By way of instant petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of

mandamus directing respondent No.2 to consider his claim for the allotment of a plot under the Local Displaced Persons Quota in lieu of his acquired

land for 'Mal Mandi Scheme' and to allot a plot as per the entitlement of the petitioner as he had already deposited the earnest money in January 2009.

2.

The petitioner was owner in possession of the land which was acquired by respondent No.2 vide notification dated 29.11.2001 (Annexure P-1) for

the development of 'Mal Mandi Scheme'. Respondent No.2 asked all the eligible persons to deposit the earnest money for the allotment of plots at

reserve price. In response thereto, the petitioner applied for the allotment of a plot and also deposited earnest money vide receipt dated 28.1.2009

(Annexure P-2). Thereafter, the petitioner moved av representation dated 27.4.2017 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2 for the allotment of a plot

under the quota of Local Displaced Persons, but no response has been received till date. The petitioner sought information under the Right to

Information Act, 2005 vide application dated 26.9.2017 (Annexure P-4) regarding the non-allotment of a plot under the Local Displaced Persons

Quota which was received vide reply dated 2.11.2017 (Annexure P-5). Hence, the present writ petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner has sent a representation dated 27.4.2017

(Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

4.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, 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.2 to take a decision on the representation dated 27.4.2017 (Annexure P-3), in accordance

with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of the certified copy of the order.