C.W.P. No.15956 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.15956 of 2009 Date of Decision:17.05.2010 Smt. Anu Tangri w/o Sh. Rajiv Tangri r/o 64-E, Rani Ka Bagh, Amritsar ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab through Principal Secretary, Local Government Department, Punjab, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents Present: Mr. R.S. Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manohar Lall, Addl. A.G., Punjab for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Prem Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner's grievance is that the property which had been allotted to her was resumed on her inability to pay the balance of sale consideration within the stipulated time. The counsel for the petitioner relies on a policy for condonation issued by the Government of Punjab on 19.04.2005 that constituted the Director, Local Government as a person competent to condone the delay for sufficient reasons. It appears that the petitioner had set out the reasons for the delay in payment of the consideration before the Improvement Trust for onward transmission to the Government for consideration and the Improvement Trust had also recommended her case as fit for consideration for condonation of delay. The State C.W.P. No.15956 of 2009 -2- Government, however, has not taken a decision and has filed a written statement before this Court stating that the requisite formalities from the stage of issuance of letter of allotment to the execution of the sale deed in favour of the allottee shall be the function of the Improvement Trust and the Government has no role to play in the routine functioning. This reply, in my view, does not address the grievance of the petitioner, for the power of condonation of delay vests only with the Government functionary namely the Director, Local Government and it could not be done by the Improvement Trust itself. 2. The writ petition itself may be treated as a representation made by the petitioner for condonation of delay as proposed through the Improvement Trust and the Director, Local Government will take a decision within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. In the event of the petitioner being found eligible for consideration, the petitioner shall strictly comply with the schedule of payment and on any failure on her part, it will result in the consequence of lapse as provided by the relevant Rules. On the other hand, if the Government on its consideration does not favour the plea for condonation of delay as canvassed by the petitioner, she will be at liberty to make a grievance against such a decision in independent proceedings. 3. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE May 17, 2010 Pankaj*