CWP No. 838 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P.No. 838 of 2007 Date of decision 12 .5.2008 Balwinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana ... Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Rahish Pahwa Dudeja, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Suveer Sehgal, Addl. AG Punjab. M.M.KUMAR, J. In this bunch of six petitions namely CWP Nos. 838, 2277, 2278, 2305, 2367 and 2384 of 2007 the petitioners have sought direction to the respondents to release them the amount of Rs. two lacs in their favour as per the provisions of the Rehabilitation Package dated 6.10.2006 (Annexure P.1). The petitioners have claimed that they are Red Card holders and are presumed to be riot victims of 1984. The State Government has issued clarification on 15.2.2006 and 17.2.2006 which is to the effect that rehabilitation grant is to be paid to those who have migrated to Punjab from other riot effected states and were still living in the State of Punjab. Therefore those who have migrated outside the State of Punjab after being issued Red Cards are not entitled to rehabilitation grant as per the package announced by the Central Government. The clarification dated 15/17.2.2006 is taken on record as Mark “A”. It was further clarified on 29.5.2006 that in cases where claimants have Red Cards with the same number then such claims are to be rejected. It was reiterated that those who have hired accommodation in district Ludhiana with a view to get rehabilitation grant CWP No. 838 of 2007 2 although they have been residing outside the State of Punjab, would also not be entitled to the grant. The clarification dated 29.5.2006 is also taken on record as Mark “B”. Looking at the nature of the controversy raised we directed the Committee reviewing all such cases to consider the cases of the petitioners and status report of the Committee be made available to this Court. Accordingly status report has been received. In the cases of Balwinder Singh son of Kishan Singh ( CWP No.838 of 2007) , Sarwan Singh son of Pritam Singh (CWP No.2277 of 2007) Pritam Singh son of Ram Kishan Singh (CWP No.2278 of 2007), Karnail Singh son of Pritam Singh (CWP No.2384 of 2004) it has been found that they are not residing at the addresses given by them. In the case of Balwinder Singh residence was got verified through Sr.Superintendent of Police to check whether he has been staying at the address given since 2002 as was claimed by him. On verification it was found that Balwinder Singh had never stayed at the given address and his affidavit was false. Similar findings have been recorded in the case of others. Likewise, Kuldeep Singh son of Diwan Singh (CWP No.2305 of 2007) has also not been found to be entitled to any such relief. He has given four addresses and the last address given by him was verified by sending District Revenue Officer, Ludhiana and on verification it was found from his son that his father was living at Chattisgarh with his younger brother Harminder Singh and he occasionally visits Punjab. It was found that Mohinder Singh and Malinder Singh are the same persons who have already claimed grant. Therefore, the claim made by petitioner Kuldip Singh was found to be without merit. CWP No. 838 of 2007 3 From the proceedings of the meeting of the District Level Sub Committee dated 10.5.2008, which has been placed on record, it is absolutely clear that the petitioners are not entitled to the grant of benefit of Rehabilitation Package dated 16.1.2006 ( Annexure P.1) as clarified by the respondent State on 15/17.2.2006 and 29.5.2006. There is thus no merit in all these petitions and the same are hereby dismissed. A copy of this order be placed on the file of connected petitions. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Sabina) 12.5.2008 Judge okg