- (1.) Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 6.3.2013 (Annexure P-3), whereby respondent no.2 has rejected the claim of the petitioner for allotment of plot, holding that the petitioner was not successful in the draw of lots for allotment of plot in Sector 32, Urban Estate, Karnal. The petitioner has further sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to cancel the allotment of plot No.673 measuring 4 maral, Sector 32, Urban Estate, Karnal, for which, the petitioner was found successful in the draw of lots held on 30.8.2011.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that pursuant to the advertisement, inviting applications for allotment of plots of various sizes in Sector 32, Urban Estate, Karnal, the petitioner applied for a 4 marlas plot vide his application No.232243 and registration No.UEO/26/32/4.00M/GENERAL/ALL/11498 after depositing the earnest money which was got financed from the Bank of Baroda. The draw of lots of said plots was conducted on 30.8.2011 and in the said draw of lots, the petitioner was declared successful. Since the amount of earnest money, which was got financed by the petitioner from the bank, was transferred in the bank account of HUDA, it is the claim of the petitioner that despite being successful in the draw of lots and accepting his earnest money, allotment letter was not issued to him. He approached the department on number of occasions but his request was ignored. Ultimately, the petitioner resorted to a legal notice followed by filing of CWP No.24137 of 2012. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 6.12.2012 in the following manner:- "By making reference to a document Annexure P1, counsel for the petitioner states that in a draw of lots, to allot plots, the petitioner was allotted a plot bearing No. 673, Sector 32, Karnal measuring 4 marlas by respondent No.1- Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "HUDA"). Against a demand raised, sale consideration was deposited. To say so, reference has been made to a document Annexure P2. When allotment letter was not issued, the petitioner sent a legal notice on 28.9.2012 (Annexure P3) yielding no result. Hence, this writ petition. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of this writ petition directing respondent No.2 to issue allotment letter to the petitioner, if there is no legal hitch, forthwith. If any adverse order is to be passed by respondent No.2 against the petitioner, an opportunity of hearing be afforded to him before doing so. Needful shall be done within 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order".
(3.) In compliance of the order passed in CWP No.24137 of 2012, respondent no.2 has passed the impugned order dated 6.3.2013, whereby the claim of the petitioner was considered and rejected. The concluding para of the said order reads thus:- "Hence, keeping in view all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner was not successful in the draw but due to clerical mistake at the time of feeding/hosting the result on HUDA website, the petitioner's name was hosted in place of the name of Shefali Chourasia i.e. the successful applicant at the time of draw and as such, he is not entitled for allotment of Plot No.673 measuring 4 Marla, Sector 32, Urban Estate, Karnal.";