IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4341 of 2009 Date of decision: March 19, 2009. M/s Shakumbri Exports ...Petitioner(s) v. Haryana Urban Development Authority & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Amit Jhanji, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mrs. Kamla Malik, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner is a dyeing unit in Panipat. It was allotted an industrial plot, No.210 measuring 1,000 square yards in Sector 29, Part II, Panipat on 2.12.2003. The allotment was later on cancelled vide an order dated 11.3.2005. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was allowed by the Chief Administrator, HUDA vide order dated 29th August/4th September, 2007. The Estate Officer, HUDA, Panipat, however, has filed a revision petition against the said order which is pending before the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Govt. Haryana, Department of Town and Country Planning since the year 2007. On the pretext of the pendency of the said revision petition, neither the petitioner is being permitted to deposit the due installments nor possession of the subject plot has been handed over to it. The petitioner apprehends creation of third party rights in respect of the available plots. Having heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and keeping in view the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to the learned Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Govt. Haryana, Department of Town and Country Planning to dispose of the pending revision petition as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Till then, it is directed that the industrial plot bearing No.210, Sector 29, Part II, Panipat (measuring 1,000 square yards) shall not be allotted to any other party. It is, however, made clear that the pendency of the revision petition shall not preclude the petitioner from raising its claim for allotment of a plot measuring 3,000 square meters and for that purpose, liberty is granted to it to represent the authorities who, in turn, are directed to consider the same in the light of the judgment dated December 11, 2008 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.11839 of 2007 (Jagdamba Processors and others v. State of Haryana and others). March 19, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge