IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6396 of 2009 Date of decision: April 28, 2009. Pran Nath Mehra ...Petitioner(s) v. State of Punjab & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): Notice of motion. Shri G.S. Attariwala, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner seeks quashing of the reply to his legal notice dated 25.2.2009 (Annexure P-19) whereby his claim for allotment of an alternative site as a 'Rehabilitation Package' under the Galiara Project, Golden Temple, Amritsar has been declined on the ground that he has failed to produce the lease-deed to prove that he is a tenant since 23.1.1976. The petitioner's grievance is that when he applied for allotment of the alternative accommodation under the Galiara Project, Golden Temple, Amritsar in the prescribed application form, he appended the rent receipts, ration card, sales tax records and his income tax returns in order to establish that he is a tenant since 23.1.1976 in one of the premises required to be vacated for implementation of the Galiara Project. However, overlooking the clinching documentary evidence, his claim has been turned down by sending a perfunctory reply to the legal notice. Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties at some length and on perusal of the record, I am of the considered view that the petitioner's claim requires reconsideration in an objective manner. Suffice it to say that execution of a lease deed can not be a condition precedent for creating lease rights. There can be an oral tenancy also. The petitioner, however, is required to satisfy the competent authority with the aid of documentary evidence that he is actually a tenant in occupation of the premises since 23.1.1976. For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed to the extent that the reply to the legal notice dated 25.2.2009 (Annexure P-19) is set aside and the Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar-cum-Project Director, Galiara Project Golden Temple Amritsar is directed to reconsider the petitioner's claim by giving an opportunity to him to produce the additional evidence/material, if any, in support of his claim. The petitioner's claim shall be disposed of by passing a reasoned order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Dasti. April 28, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge