IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.7690 of 2008 Date of Decision: 08.07.2009 Vishav Adhiatmik Sangh Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and others Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr.Ashwani Chopra, Senior Advocate with Ms.Shaibya Sood, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Tarunveer Vashisth, Additional Advocate General, Haryana Mr.Manish Bansal, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3 ….. Jasbir Singh, J.(Oral) Vide allotment letter dated 10.2.1984 (Annexure P1), a piece of land, for running a school, was allotted to the petitioner society. School building was constructed and as per admitted position, school is functioning at the spot. Vide order dated 4.10.2006, to run management of that school, City Magistrate was appointed as an Administrator under the Education Act, 1995. Record shows that in the meantime, site allotted was resumed on 20.9.2006 (Annexure P19) for non-deposit of dues, construction of building without getting plan sanctioned and some other reasons. Petitioner society went in appeal, which was dismissed on 29.2.2008 (Annexure P20). As per provisions of Section 17 of the HUDA Act, 1977, the petitioner society filed a revision petition, which was also dismissed by observing as under:- “I have carefully heard the arguments and gone through the record of the case. The objection raised by DDA, HUDA is absolutely valid. With effect from 4.10.06, the management Civil Writ Petition No.7690 of 2008 and control of the organization vests in the City Magistrate, Hisar who has been appointed as the Administrator. The petitioner has no authority to file the revision petition. Therefore, the same is dismissed on the ground that it has been filed by persons who are not authorized to do so. Order has been reserved in this case after conclusion of arguments. The same is being pronounced today. May be conveyed to the parties.” This Court feels that the revisional authority was not justified in dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioner society, by stating that it was not maintainable being filed by an unauthorized person. It is apparent from the records that City Magistrate was appointed under the Education Act, 1955. Property was allotted to the Society and the society continued to be its owner till such time it is divested of the ownership under a legal process. Resumption order was under challenge and only the Society was competent to challenge and not the Manager. In view of facts mentioned above, this writ petition is allowed, order dated 17.4.2008 (Annexure P22) is set aside and matter is remitted to the authority concerned to decide it afresh on merits. Parties are directed to appear before the revisional authority on 23.7.2009. The petitioner may move an application for any interim relief before the revisional authority. 08.07.2009 (Jasbir Singh) gk Judge 2