CWP No.20987 of 2008.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.20987 of 2008 Date of Decision: 19.07.2010 **** Major A.S. Puri . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Anr. . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. GS Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. K.S. Sidhu, DAG Punjab Mr. G.S. Attariwala, Advocate for respondent No.2 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the Improvement Trust, Amritsar to allot him the plot @ 652/- per sq. yard at par with the similarly- situated allottees. (2). Shorn of the details,it may be mentioned that the petitioner was allotted Plot No.E-317 measuring 400 sq.yards at a reserve price of 202.50 paise per sq.yards vide allotment letter dated 12.12.1986 (Annexure P3) by the respondent-Trust. The CWP No.20987 of 2008.doc - 2 – above-stated allotment was later on cancelled which action of the respondent-Trust was successfully challenged by the petitioner before this Court in CWP No.6329 of 2002 decided on 20.11.2003 (Annexure P13) in the following terms:- xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx In view of the above, this petition is allowed with costs and the respondent- Improvement Trust is directed to allot the plot to the petitioner and that if the plot earlier allotted to the petitioner bearing No.E-317, is available the same plot shall be allotted to the petitioner. However, if for any reasons the said plot is not available a fresh allotment shall be made in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law. The costs are assessed at Rs.20,000/-. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (3). The Improvement Trust preferred SLP (Civil) No.19586 of 2004 which has been dismissed by the Supreme Court on 09.02.2007 (Annexure P14). CWP No.20987 of 2008.doc - 3 – (4). Thereafter, the petitioner has been allotted Plot No.E-326 measuring 400 sq.yard at Ajnala Road, Extension Scheme, Amritsar vide allotment letter dated 19.05.2008 but @ Rs.12000/- per sq. yard though prior thereto these plots were offered @ Rs.652/- per sq.yards (Annexure P15). (5). Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. (6). The respondent-Trust has filed the reply/affidavit justifying its action on the plea that the allotments are made from time to time as per the rates fixed by the Collector, Amritsar and that in the year 2007-08, the Collector’s Rate fixed for the subject plot was Rs.12000 per sq. yard. On the other hand, the case of the petitioner is that similarly- situated persons whose allotments were earlier cancelled but has been restored under the orders of this Court and/or other Courts, have been in the meanwhile allotted the plots @ 652. per sq. yard. (7). I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the records. (8). In my considered view, the delay, if any, in adjudication of the petitioner’s case and/or pendency of litigation cannot work to his CWP No.20987 of 2008.doc - 4 – disadvantage for no fault on his part. The fact of the matter is that all those allottees of the year 1986 whose allotments were cancelled but have been subsequently restored under the Court orders have been allotted plots @ 652 per sq.yard. The petitioner being a similarly-placed person, is entitled to the same treatment though he might be liable to pay interest for the delayed payments. (9). The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the subsequent allotment letter dated 19.05.2008 (Annexure P15) is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall also be liable to pay the allotment price @ 652 per sq. yard along with simple interest from the due date at the rate prescribed under the Rules and/or Terms and Conditions of the allotment. The due amount shall be calculated and informed to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and the petitioner shall deposit the same within a period of two months thereafter with interest upto date. (10). Ordered accordingly. (11). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 19.07.2010 CWP No.20987 of 2008.doc - 5 – vishal shonkar