IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.385 of 2011 Date of Decision : January 10 , 2011. Gurdeep Singh and others .....Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Munish Jolly, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Monika Chhibbar Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr.H.S.Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.3 & 4. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Ms.Monika Chhibbar Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 2 and on the asking of the Court, Mr.H.S.Brar, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.3 & 4. Let two copies each of the writ petition be supplied to learned counsel for the respondents during the course of day. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioners are said to be victims of 1984 riots to whom the Rehri Sites measuring 4 square yards each have been allotted vide C.W.P.No .385 of 2011 2 memos dated 11.6.2010 and 21.7.2010 (Annexures P-2 & P-3 respectively) at the cost of Rs.5,02,294/- and Rs.5,52,523/- (corner site). The petitioners are said to have deposited the demanded amount/part thereof under protest on the plea that the respondent-authorities have failed to disclose/explain as to how the afore-mentioned prices have been determined. It is stated that in the year 2002, the price of these sites were fixed at the concessional rates of Rs.77,800/- and Rs.85,580/-, respectively. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that though the petitioners have an obligation to deposit the sale price as demanded by the competent authority, yet they are entitled to know as to how the said price has been determined when the allotments are said to have been made on concessional rates. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to intimate the petitioners as to how the above-mentioned prices of the Rehri Sites have been fixed. The intimation shall be submitted to the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that the petitioners shall be required to deposit the sale price as per the schedule fixed by the respondents though without prejudice to their rights to challenge the same before an appropriate forum. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. January 10, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE