- (1.) The order dated 18.03.2011 had been passed on an assumption that the property had been re-allotted to some other parties and the issue of allotment of the year 1989 cannot survive for consideration two decades later. At the time when the order was passed, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. This re-allotment itself was pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner as having been withdrawn and there was a specific order of this Court that the property shall not be re-allotted to any other party pending the writ petition. It is shown to the that the property remains unallotted and is vacant for all these years. The order was passed on an erroneous assumption and it is, therefore, recalled. Application for recalling the order passed in the absence of the counsel for the petitioner is allowed.
(2.) I have directed both the counsel to argue the case on merits and I proceed to dispose of the case now, on merits. Civil Writ Petition No. 16258 of 1989
(3.) The writ petition contains a challenge to the proceedings of the Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC), dated 27.07.1989, withdrawing the offer of allotment of an industrial plot bearing No. 53-54 at Gurgaon. The letter purports to make a refund of the money deposited by the petitioner for allotment of the plot.;