IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 15345 of 2007. Date of Decision: 2nd March, 2009. Hari Ram Goel & Ors. ....Petitioners through Mr. M.L.Sharma, Advocate Versus State of Haryana & Ors. .Respondents through Mr. R.D.Sharma, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. Rajvir Sihag, 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. 15345 and 15393 of 2007 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No. 15345 of 2007. The petitioners seek a direction for allotment of Industrial Plots to them in the Industrial Estate, IMT Manesar under the “oustees policy”. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, reply/affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 – Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation. It is explained that the allotment of plots to all the categories including Oustees is governed under the Estate Management Procedure [EMP] 2005 which has been incorporated in the Industrial Policy, 2005. It has been further averred that the plots under the “Oustees Quota” have not been advertised so far and the petitioners shall, subject to their eligibility, be entitled to apply for such allotment as and when the plots are advertised. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents that whenever the plots under the Oustees Quota in terms of the aforementioned policy are advertised, the claim of the petitioners shall also be considered, in accordance with law. Disposed of. March 2, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE