IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 18394 of 2007. Date of Decision: 28th May, 2009. Deepak Garg Petitioner through Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate Versus HUDA & Anr. Respondents through Ms. Preeti Khanna, 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) The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 30.6.2007 passed by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Karnal whereby his request for the refund of the compound and penal interest has been declined primarily on the ground that the petitioner purchased the subject plot from the original allottee by way of a sale deed and thereafter re-allotment letter has been issued in his favour. Learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of hearing, refers to an order dated 17.11.2008 passed by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Karnal in the case of one Vijay Kumar son of Om Parkash, the last paragraph of which reads as under:- “Moreover, there are few petitioners, who have sold their plots. The matter was referred to Worthy Chief Administrator and it has been conveyed vide letter/instruction dated 18.10.2006 that the present owner/allottee is entitled for any refund as all the rights and liabilities vest in the present owner after transfer of the plot/house in his name”. Relying upon the above reproduced observations, learned counsel urges that the respondents themselves have taken a conscious decision that the re-allottee is also at par with the original allottee for the purposes of incidental benefits. However, the detailed facts and circumstances which led to passing of the order dated 17.11.2008 are not on record. In these circumstances, while setting aside the order dated 30.6.2007 passed by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Karnal, the matter is remitted to the said Authority to take a fresh decision, in accordance with law. It is clarified that while issuing the aforesaid directions, merits of the case have not been gone into. Disposed of. Dasti. May 28, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE