C.W.P. No.7727 of 1988 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.7727 of 1988 Date of Decision:04.02.2010 Ganesh Das Wason ......Petitioner Versus The Estate Officer, Faridabad and others ....Respondents Present: Mr. Vaibhav Prashar, Advocate for Mr. J.K. Sibbal, Sr. Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, DAG, Haryana for respondent Nos.1 to 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 writ petition came to be filed in the year 1988 when resumption of a plot was ordered by the Haryana Urban Development Authority on the ground that the petitioner had not completed the construction of the plot within the time stipulated in the agreement. The petitioner claimed to be a purchaser, who had been under the impression that he could complete the construction within two years from the date of purchase. 2. At the time when the writ petition was admitted on 06.09.1988, this Hon'ble Court has directed that the property shall not be allotted or sold to any other person till further orders. Subsequently at various times, the matter has come up for hearing. Learned counsel appearing for Haryana Development Authority has C.W.P. No.7727 of 1988 -2- only sought time to secure instructions whether the construction has been completed or not. Even today, learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to give any information whether the construction has been completed or not. 3. In view of a changed position over a period of time and when the learned counsel for the Haryana Urban Development Authority has conceded that they would allow for continuance of possession, if penalty as prescribed is paid, the petitioner will have the benefit of the order of resumption quashed and if construction is not completed already, it shall be done within a period of six months from today. The respondent shall be at liberty to levy a penalty as prescribed under the terms and conditions of original allotment. 4. Subject to this liberty to the respondent, the impugned orders of resumption are quashed and the right of the petitioner to the property is secured with a concomitant duty to complete the construction within a period of six months. Any construction, if it is completed, the site plan shall be furnished to the respondents and if it has not completed of the same, the proposed site plan shall be submitted to the respondents. 5. Subject to these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE February 04, 2010 Pankaj*