IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 14811 of 2010 Date of Decision: 19.8.2010. Sh. Amarnath Bansal --Petitioner Versus H.U.D.A. And others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate present in the Court has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. Plot No. 1564, Sector 48, Faridabad was allotted to the petitioner vide letter dated 19.7.1992 It is alleged that the said plot was under litigation and the possession of the same could not be handed over to the petitioner. The authorities mooted a proposal for allotment of alternative plot to the petitioner. Petitioner accepted the proposal for allotment of alternative plot. Accordingly, an alternative plot No. 206 in the same sector was offered to him. It is further alleged that even this plot was under litigation and could not be handed over to the petitioner. Petitioner made representation in this regard. Petitioner approached the Consumer Forum by filing complaint no.335 which was decided vide order dated 8.12.2004 and a direction was issued to allot an alternative plot No.72-P, CWP. No. 14811 of 2010 -2- Sector 21-C-III, Faridabad within next 30 days. Petitioner was also awarded compensation and costs etc. H.U.D.A filed an appeal before the State Consumer Commission which was dismissed vide order dated 16.7.2010. It is stated that during the pendency of this appeal the parties entered into a mutual arrangement and on that basis the Chief Administrator, H.U.D.A vide communication dated 27.7.2010 addressed to the Estate Officer, H.U.D.A, Faridabad directed that the name of the petitioner be also included in the mini draw in respect to the plots no.99, 178-A and 648 in sector 21-C (Annexure P-5). It is stated that a mini draw was held but the name of the petitioner was not included in the draw. There were only three applicants and names of only two applicants were included in the mini draw. Plots no. 99 and 178-A were allotted through mini draw, whereas plot no.648 is still lying vacant. Petitioner has accordingly, approached this Court seeking implementation of communication dated 27.7.2010. Petitioner also made representation (Annexure P-6) seeking the allotment of the alternative plot on the basis of the mutual settlement but no decision has been taken thereon till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the representation made by the petitioner, referred to above, in the light of the mutual settlement and till then the plot no.648, Sector 21-C III, Faridabad be not allotted to any other person. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to take decision on the representation made by the petitioner in the light of Annexure P-5, within a period of two months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the said respondent. Till the representation of the petitioner is decided, plot no.648, Sector 21-C- III, Faridabad be not allotted to any other person. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 19.8.2010. lucky