IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 17907 of 2008. Date of Decision: 26th March, 2009. Mohan Lal ....Petitioner through Mr. M.K.Singla, Advocate Versus Chief Administrator, U.T., Chandigarh & Ors....Respondents through Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 10961 and 17907 of 2008 as both the petitions have been filed by the same petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved at the orders dated 11.8.2005 and 6.12.2006 [Annexures P-11 and P-13] respectively whereby his claim for the transfer of Tenement bearing No. 2222/1, Sector 37-C, Chandigarh which was allotted to one Ram Nath son of Sri Ram (since dead), has been declined. The petitioner sought the transfer in his favour on the plea that Ram Nath was his real uncle who died issue-less and wife-less. The petitioner, therefore, claims himself to be within the definition of “family unit”. The respondents have turned down the petitioner's claim primarily on the ground that Ram Nath, during his life time, had informed in writing that he had a son, daughter-in-law and grand-son. In other words, the stand taken by the respondents is that there are other legal heirs of Ram Nath who have a preferential right over and above the petitioner's claim. According to the respondents, the petitioner has also failed to establish his relationship with the deceased Ram Nath. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, I am of the considered view that the questions as to whether or not the deceased Ram Nath left behind a son, daughter-in-law and grand children or whether or not the petitioner is the real nephew of deceased Ram Nath, are pure questions of fact, which cannot be effectively responded by a writ Court. At the same time, the respondents need not to depend upon the written communication, if any, of the deceased Ram Nath and start presuming that he has left behind natural legal heirs. The respondents are obligated to hold a fact finding inquiry to determine as to whether or not the deceased Ram Nath has left behind his son, daughter-in-law and grand children. An effort can be made to trace out them at the place of origin of the deceased. The fact finding enquiry shall also be directed to see that the petitioner, in order to grab the tenement, has not committed any foul play with the family members of the deceased. If the authorities are unable to find out any such legal heir, in that event only, they shall permit the petitioner to produce the material/evidence to establish his relationship with the deceased. The final decision regarding the transfer of the said tenement shall depend upon the outcome of the fact finding inquiry. The needful shall be done within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. Till then status-quo with regard to the petitioner's possession shall be maintained. Disposed of. March 26, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE