IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.6392 of 2011 Smt.Krishna Devi Vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula & others Present: Mr.M.P.S.Mann, Advocate, for Mr.Amit Shivrain, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. Respondent No.3 was allotted a Plot No.1458, Sector 4 Extension, Rohtak measuring 319.92 sq.meters under the defence quota. The petitioner bought this plot from respondent No.3 for a consideration on 13.12.2007. Submission is that the plot was transferred on her name and she has subsequently paid the instalments thereof. Now official respondents have sought to cancel the allotment in favour of respondent No.3 as he is found not entitled to a plot under defence quota on various counts. Notice was issued to respondent No.3, who has not appeared to respond to the same. The petitioner appeared before the authorities, but she was not afforded any hearing. Claiming herself to be bonafide purchase, the petitioner has filed this writ petition to say that she is required to be heard before any adverse order is passed in this case. The cancellation order is of a plot allotted to respondent No.3. The petitioner, if being bonafide purchaser, can have a remedy against respondent No.3. For cancellation of plot allotted to respondent No.3, the petitioner may not have locus to complain. Still, the petitioner can have an alternative remedy by approaching the civil court as it is a dispute arising out of a contract between the petitioner and respondent No.3, which can more appropriately be gone into by the civil court. Writ court may not be an appropriate forum. Dismissed. April 08, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE