CWP No.6352 of 2007 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6352 of 2007 Date of decision: January 30, 2009. Kuldip Chand ...Petitioner(s) v. State of Punjab & 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 K.S. Rekhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri G.S. Attariwala, Additional Advocate General, Punjab Shri Gurminder Singh, Advocate for respondent(s) No.3. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioner seeks quashing of a letter-cum-order dated 26.4.2007, Annexure P-6, whereby allotment of govt. house bearing No.MIG 2154/A, Sector 66, SAS Nagar (Mohali) has been cancelled by the Estate Officer, GMADA. The petitioner is an employee of the Deputy Commissioner's (DC) office at SAS Nagar, Mohali. It appears that in terms of some Govt. decision taken in a meeting chaired by the Chief Secretary, Punjab on 12.9.2006, some flats owned by GMADA, which were lying vacant and CWP No.6352 of 2007 -: 2 :- unallotted,were decided to be allotted to the employees of the Deputy Commissioner's office at SAS Nagar, Mohali on ad hoc basis and as a stop- gap arrangement. Pursuant to the said decision, the petitioner was allotted the aforementioned flat. He occupied it, however, after some time, the Estate Officer issued the impugned order cancelling the petitioner's allotment and directing him to hand over the vacant possession. Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. Admittedly, the petitioner continues in possession of the subject flat under the interim orders passed by this Court on 19.2.2008. Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties for some time and keeping in view the stand taken by the GMADA, I am of the considered view that the allotment of the above stated accommodation in favour of the petitioner, being a govt. employee, was made as a stop-gap arrangement and is of temporary nature. This, however, does not entitle the respondents to get the subject flat vacated from the petitioner even without taking a policy decision regarding allotment of the govt./GMADA vacant houses available in SAS Nagar. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents that a policy decision regarding allotment of govt. accommodation to the employees of the Deputy Commissioner's office at SAS Nagar may be taken and a priority list of all the eligible employees in terms of the said policy decision may be prepared. If, as per the said policy decision and the priority list, the petitioner is also found entitled for allotment of a govt./GMADA house, he may be either allowed to continue to retain the subject flat and/or may be allotted any other alternative accommodation. Till such a decision is taken, the petitioner shall not be CWP No.6352 of 2007 -: 3 :- dispossessed. Needless to say that in case the petitioner is found ineligible, he shall have no right to claim the govt. accommodation. January 30, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge