CWP No.20270 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P.No. 20270 of 2008 Date of decision 1 .12.2008 Union Territory of Chandigarh ...Petitioner Versus The Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services and others. ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH Present: Mr. K.K.Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The Union Territory, Chandigarh through its Assistant Estate Officer has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing order dated 27.11.2007 ( Annexure P.3) passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Sector 17, Chandigarh whereby a direction has been issued in favour of Jhuggi Dweller- respondent no.2 to allot him alternative site in lieu of taking over his Jhuggi in Kumhar Colony, Sector 25, Chandigarh. The Jhuggi Dweller- respondent no.2 was found eligible for allotment of an alternative site and accordingly list of such persons was published in the Dainik Bhaskar. The name of the applicant- respondent no.2 appeared at serial No.2. The alternative site was allotted to some persons and on enquiry it was found that Plot No.218, Sector 25, Chandigarh has been allotted to applicant- respondent no.2. However, he came to know that infact it has been allotted to respondent no.3 who is his CWP No.20270 of 2008 2 name sake. The applicant- respondent no.2 filed CWP No. 5444 of 2005 in this Court which was disposed of on 4.4.2005 with a direction to the respondents to decide his representation after giving an opportunity of hearing to the applicant- respondent no. 2. In compliance of that order the Assistant Estate Officer- petitioner has passed an order stating that the applicant- respondent no.2 was eligible for allotment of an alternative site under the 1979 Scheme and that he would be considered in the next draw of lots. A copy of the letter dated 22.6.2005 has been placed on record as Annexure A.5. The Permanent Lok Adalat has only issued direction to the petitioner to comply with its own order passed on 22.6.2005 ( annexure A.5). The applicant- respondent no.2 has been deprived of the plot merely because of the glaring mistake committed by the petitioner. The plot was wrongly allotted to respondent no.3 i.e. Dharamvir s/o Lakhi Ram. Mr.K.K.Gupta learned counsel for the Administration has argued that the Permanent Lok Adalat, Public Utility Services should not have entertained a petition of this nature where property disputes are involved. According to the learned counsel such disputes shall be left to the jurisdiction of the regular Civil Courts. Having heard learned counsel we are of the considered view that this petition is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed because a genuine Jhuggi Dweller- applicant respondent no.2 has been deprived of his right of allotment of alternative plot which has been acknowledged by the petitioner when he passed order dated 22.6.2005 ( Annexure A.5). For no fault of applicant- respondent no.2 he has suffered for so long. We find that substantial justice has been done by asking the petitioner to adhere to his own order dated 22.6.2005 ( annexure A.5). The argument of the learned counsel has not impressed us because in the facts CWP No.20270 of 2008 3 and circumstances of the case such a pedantic view cannot be taken. There is no room for interference in the impugned order. Accordingly the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jora Singh) 1 .12.2008 Judge okg