Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harbans Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 3 August, 2012
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.14747 of 2012
Date of Decision : August 03, 2012
Harbans Singh and others .....Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH.
Present : Mr.Mansur Ali, Advocate, for the petitioners.
-.-
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 petitioners are '1984 Anti-Sikh Riot' victims. After one or two rounds of legal fight and in terms of the directions issued by a learned Single Judge vide order dated 19.4.2011 in CWP No.1531 of 2010 (Harbans Singh and others versus State of Punjab and others), GMADA has now offered alternative booth sites to the petitioners vide memos dated 29.3.2012 (Annexure P-9), according to which the petitioners are required to vacate the shops unauthorizedly occupied by them in front of Gurdwara Amb Sahib, Sector 62, SAS Nagar Mohali. The petitioners are said to have vacated the said shops. The alternative booth sites have been allotted to the petitioners at the price of Rs.13,91,420/- each with an option to pay 25% of the allotted price within 30 days and balance 75% in four equated yearly installments alongwith interest @ 12% per annum.
The petitioners have three fold grievances against the afore- stated offer. Firstly, they urge that the allotments were required to be made at the rate as it was in the year 1993-94 when they were discriminately left out. Secondly, the Government Policies do not prescribe imposition of CWP No.14747 of 2012. [2] interest on the installments to be payable by the victims of Anti-Sikh Riots. Thirdly, the price determined by GMADA is not as per the Government policies as the element of profit has been added.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and gone through the record.
Since the primary contention of the petitioners revolves around the alleged breach of Government policies by GMADA, and as prayed for by their learned counsel, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, Punjab, to treat this writ petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioners and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.
Ordered accordingly.
Dasti.
(SURYA KANT)
JUDGE
August 03, 2012 (R.P.NAGRATH)
Mohinder JUDGE