JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE petitioners have failed twice before this court and twice before the Apex Court. They have now ventured upon a third round of litigation. A few facts, as relevant for the decision of this case, may be briefly noticed.
(2.) THE petitioners were given land on lease under the provisions of the East Punjab Utilization of Lands Act, 1949 in the year 1956. At the expiry of the period of lease, proceedings for their eviction were initiated. The Assistant Collector vide his order dated December 31, 1984, had accepted the application and ordered the eviction of the petitioners. They filed an appeal. It was dismissed by the Commissioner. Thereafter, they approached the Court through various Civil Writ Petitions, including Writ Petition Nos. 4376 to 4378 of 1985 and Writ Petition Nos. 323 and 324 of 1986. Vide Order dated March 20, 1986, these petitions were dismissed by a Bench of this Court. Thereafter, the petitioners filed Special Leave Petitions, which were dismissed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court. Despite these orders of the Court, the petitioner did not vacate the land. On the contrary, they initiated fresh proceedings by filing Civil Writ Petition No. 5075 of 1999. In this petition, a prayer was made that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued directing the respondent-State to allot the land in their possession to them at the reserve price. Notice of this petition was given to the respondents. The parties were heard. Vide order dated January 30, 2001, the petition was dismissed by this Bench. It was held that the petitioner had no right or title in the property. Resultantly, the prayer for allotment of the land to the petitioners was declined. The petitioners filed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5219 of 2001. It was dismissed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court, vide order dated April 4, 2001.
(3.) NOW the third round of litigation has been initiated. The petitioners allege that the provisions of Haryana Act No. 13 of the 1996 create a discrimination between the persons, who had been allotted land prior to 1961 and those who were allotted land during the period from May 4, 1961 to July 9, 1985. The provision contained in Section 2(g)(ii-a) is, thus, ultra-vires Article 14 of the Constitution. Still further it is claimed that the action of the respondents suffers from the vice of discrimination. On these premises, the petitioners pray that a writ of certiorari be issued, "quashing Haryana Amendment Act No. 13 of 1996 dated April 15, 1996.";