IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 20453 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : 14.10.2011 Rajinder .... PETITIONER Versus The Chandigarh Administration and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present: Mr. Aman Bahri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3 to 6. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. ( Oral ) In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.1.2007 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh (respondent No.5), whereby allotment of Dwelling Unit No. 2147 at Mauli Jagran, UT Chandigarh, in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner has also challenged the orders dated 15.1.2008 (Annexure P2) and 12.4.2010 (Annexure P-4), whereby the appeals filed by him against the aforesaid order were dismissed; as well as the order dated 1.9.2010 (Annexure P5), whereby his revision petition has been dismissed. CWP No. 20453 of 2010 -2- We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned orders. In this case, vide allotment letter dated 31.3.1993, the petitioner was allotted the aforesaid Dwelling Unit on hire purchase basis. He paid all the due instalments well in time. Subsequently, vide impugned order dated 19.1.2007, the allotment was cancelled on the ground that the petitioner had mis-used the dwelling unit, and had committed certain building violations. After removing all those building violations, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention towards the order dated 15.1.2008 (Annexure P-2), passed by the Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh (respondent No.4), wherein the following observations were made : “During the hearing held on 26.9.07 the SDE (Enf.) had brought out that although the shop had been closed but the appellant has further extended a balcony on the 1st floor and stairs on the Govt. up to the 2nd floor and the appellant had also made a toilet & kitchen on the extended chhajja. The appellant was directed on 26.9.07 to remove the said violations within a month, on the hearing held on 7.11.07, it has been stated by SDE (Enf.) that no action has been taken by the appellant.” Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that all the building violations mentioned in the aforesaid order have been removed by the petitioner. This fact has also been verified by the respondent Board and on December 15, 2010, a statement was made by learned counsel for the respondents that all CWP No. 20453 of 2010 -3- the building violations have now been removed by the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that before approaching this Court, he had removed all these violations and on the statement of his counsel to this effect, notice of motion was issued in this case. This factual position has been accepted by learned counsel for respondents No.3 to 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner belongs to lower strata of the society and a small Dwelling Unit was allotted to him in Mauli Jagran, UT Chandigarh, and further in view of the fact that he has removed all the building violations to the satisfaction of the respondents, the impugned order dated 19.1.2007 (Annexure P-1) regarding cancellation of allotment of Dwelling Unit of the petitioner and the subsequent orders passed by the Appellate as well as the revisional authorities are set aside. Consequently, the instant writ petition is allowed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE October 14, 2011 ( PARAMJEET SINGH ) ndj JUDGE