CWP No.1313 of 1990 (O&M) 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.1313 of 1990 (O&M) Date of Decision:06.05.2010 Acchar Singh (died) through LRs ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents 1. Whether Reporter of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment- Yes/No. 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not- Yes/No. 3.Whether judgment should be reported in the digest-Yes/No. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr.Malkeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 22. Mr. Raj Kamal Choudhary, Deputy Commissioner, Kapurthala in person. ..... Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioners states that present writ petition was filed in the year 1990 making grievance that application of the petitioners (Annexure P-4 ) dated 04.08.1989, requesting the Deputy Commissioner, Kapurthala to allot the land as per the Government policy in favour of the petitioners was not decided. Vide order dated 07.04.2010, Deputy Commissioner, Kapurthala was directed to appear in-person along with revenue record CWP No.1313 of 1990 (O&M) 2 pertaining to Rabi 1980 for ascertaining eligibility and orders of allotment. Learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that affidavit of Shri Raj Kamal Choudhary, Deputy Commissioner-cum- Collector, Kapurthala dated 19.03.2010 was filed before this Court enclosing therewith the list of 40 persons who have already been allotted the land. Original record is produced before me by the Deputy Commissioner, Kapurthala who is present in-person. The perusal of the record shows that list of 38 eligible persons for the allotment was prepared by the Department. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that their names are not included in the list prepared by the Deputy Commissioner and they have been left out illegally. Learned counsel for the petitioners further states that although petitioners are eligible for the allotment but they have been wrongly ignored and excluded from the list. Learned counsel for the petitioners further states that although in the present petition list prepared by the Deputy Commissioner is not under challenge but petitioners would be satisfied, if directions may be issued to the Deputy Commissioner to reconsider their names as per the policy of Government. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate appearing for the respondents and Mr. Raj Kamal Choudhary, Deputy Commissioner, Kapurthala undertakes to reconsider the name of the petitioners as per Government policy and prevailing law. He assured that the decision shall be taken by respondent No.1 within two months from the date, petitioners file their application containing all the details therein. Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to move fresh representation seeking allotment within a month from today. In CWP No.1313 of 1990 (O&M) 3 view of the statements made hereinabove by both the sides, the petition is disposed of with the direction that petitioners shall move a fresh representation within a month seeking allotment of the land and decision thereon shall be taken by the respondents within two months, thereafter in accordance with law and as per the existing policy of the allotment, till then status quo shall be maintained. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE 06.05.2010 sharmila