JUDGEMENT
Viney Mittal, J. -
(1.) Notice of motion to the respondents.
On the asking of Court, Shri Ashok Jindal, Additional
Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the
respondents.
(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
have also gone through the pleadings contained in the writ petition.
The petitioner claims himself to be an oustee and as such
is entitled to allotment of plot in the aforesaid quota in Sector 57,
Gurgaon. He consequently applied for allotment of a plot under the
aforesaid quota alongwith the earnest money. However, vide order
dated May 4, 2006 (Annexure P.12) the application filed by the
petitioner has been rejected and he ahs been declared to be ineligible
for allotment of plot under the oustee's quota. The earnest money
deposited by the petitioner has also been ordered to be refunded.
Shri Shailendra Jain, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner argues that the order (Annexure P.12) is totally a nonspeaking
order and no reason has been spelt out as to why the
petitioner has been treated to be not eligible for allotment of plot
under the oustee's quota. Shri Jain has also pointed out that the
documents on the record show that the land of the petitioner was
acquired and as such he was duly eligible for allotment of plot under
the oustee's quota.
(3.) We find merit in the contentions raised by the learned
counsel for the petitioner to the extent that the order (Annexure P.12)
is a non-speaking order and as such cannot be legally sustainable.
Consequently, we allow the present petition and quash the order
(Annexure P.12). We also direct the Estate Officer, Haryana Urban
Development Authority, respondent No.2 to decide the claim of the
petitioner. For this purpose, the petitioner would be required to file a
detailed representation within a period of three weeks from the date a
certified copy of this order is received. The petitioner shall give the
detailed facts in the aforesaid representation and shall also annex
necessary documents. On receipt of the aforesaid representation, the
Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, respondent
No.2 shall take a final decision upon the claim of the petitioner within
a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is
received, by passing a detailed speaking order. The petitioner shall
also be required to re-deposit the earnest money which has been
ordered to be refunded vide order dated May 4, 2006 (Annexure P.12)
alongwith the aforesaid application.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.