HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. PARTAP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PARTAP Singh filed suit for declaration against Haryana Urban Development Authority (in short "HUDA"), Jind through its Estate Officer to the effect that he was entitled to the allotment of a commercial plot in the Urban Estate, Jind on reserve price. It is alleged in the plaint that land measuring 136 Kanal 17 marla situated in the revenue estate of Jind as recorded in the jamabandi for the year 1974-75 was acquired by the State of Haryana for a public purpose namely the planned development in the area of Jind. In the revenue record, the land was standing in the name of Moti Ram who was father of plaintiff Partap Singh. Moti Ram died on 9.10.88. It is further alleged in the plaint that the plaintiff comes within the definition of oustee in the wake of the acquisition of the land belonging to his father for use by HUDA. As son of Moti Ram he is entitled to the allotment of commercial site in Urban Estate, Jind. Commercial sites are still available in Urban Estate, Jind and they are being sold by HUDA in open auction from time to time. Plaintiff owns no commercial site in Urban Estate, Jind, as such he is entitled to the allotment of commercial site in Jind Urban area on reserve price. He applied to the HUDA for the allotment of commercial site on reserve price vide application which was received in the office of HUDA on 16.12.1993. HUDA, however, gave no reply to that application.

(2.) DEFENDANT (HUDA) contested the suit urging that the suit is time barred. Plaintiff is not son of Moti Ram deceased. In view of Section 50 of Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, civil court has no jurisdiction. It was further urged that at the time of acquisition of the land of Moti Ram, there was no scheme/provision that an oustee was entitled to allotment of any site. This scheme was introduced by HUDA for the first time in September, 1987. Land of Moti Ram was acquired for residential purposes. It was denied that any application was received from Partap Singh for allotment of commercial plot of HUDA on 16.12.1993. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed -

(3.) HUDA went in appeal. Appeal was dismissed by Additional District Judge, Jind vide order dated 7.2.2000. Still not satisfied, HUDA has come up in appeal to this court. I have heard Shri Ashutosh Mohunta, Advocate, counsel for the appellant and have gone through the record.