Punjab-Haryana High Court
Date Of Decision:17.10.2012 vs State Of Haryana And Others on 17 October, 2012
Author: Rakesh Kumar Jain
Bench: A.K. Sikri, Rakesh Kumar Jain
CWP No.13030 of 1999 and other connected cases -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
*****
1. CWP No.13030 of 1999
Date of Decision:17.10.2012
*****
Rajinder Kumar
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
. . . . Respondents
*****
2. CWP No.18076 of 1995
*****
Harjeet Singh
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
. . . . Respondents
*****
3. CWP No.18074 of 1995
*****
Kishan Lal
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
. . . . Respondents
*****
4. CWP No.18075 of 1995
*****
Hazoor Singh
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
. . . . Respondents
*****
5. CWP No.17368 of 1995
*****
Rajender Kumar Sharma
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
. . . . Respondents
CWP No.13030 of 1999 and other connected cases -2-
*****
6. CWP No.16582 of 1994
*****
M/s Kaushik Trading and Engineering Industry and others
. . . .Petitioners
Versus
The State of Haryana and others
. . . . Respondents
*****
7. CWP No.506 of 1996
*****
Tara Singh
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
. . . . Respondents
*****
8. CWP No.507 of 1996
*****
Jaimal Singh
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
. . . . Respondents
*****
9. CWP No.18901 of 1995
*****
Jaspal
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
. . . . Respondents
*****
10. CWP No.3227 of 2000
*****
Badri Nath Chitkara
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
Haryana Govt. and another
. . . . Respondents
CWP No.13030 of 1999 and other connected cases -3-
*****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
*****
Present: Mr.Abha Rathore, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr.B.S. Rana, Addl. A.G. Haryana.
Mr.Parveen Goyal, Advocate.
Mr.Jasbir Mor, Advocate.
*****
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.
This order shall dispose of ten writ petitions bearing CWP Nos.13030 of 1999, 18074 to 18076, 17368, 18901 of 1995, 506 & 507 of 1996, 3227 of 2000 and 16582 of 1994, being identical on facts and law.
The petitioners are the scrap dealers, unauthorizedly carrying on their business in Gagan Scrap Market, Faridabad, over the land belonging to the Rehabilitation Department, forming part of the compensation pool.
Their common grievance is that the Faridabad Administration wanted to shift them to new market at periphery of NH-III Faridabad by offering various sizes of plots.
It is also a common case of the petitioners that plots were allotted in the new market for which they had paid 25% of the consideration. Allotment letters were issued to 172 scrap-dealers but before possession could be delivered, the allotment was cancelled as the proposal of allotment was not approved by the State Government. However, finally allotment CWP No.13030 of 1999 and other connected cases -4- has been made but to 127 scrap dealers instead of 172 scrap dealers and in that process, the petitioners, in this batch of petitions, were ignored. Thus, their common prayer is for allotment of plots and during the pendency of there writ petitions, they be not dispossessed.
In the written statement, it is not denied that a proposal was made to shift scrap dealers to another site in order to beautify the area as well as for smooth movement of the traffic. In pursuance thereof a meeting was held on 13.9.1988 with the office bearers of the Faridabad Scrap Dealers Welfare Association. As a result of that meeting, a letter dated 2.12.1988 was issued to the Association incorporating the proposed terms and conditions for allotment of the alternative sites subject to the approval of the State Government and vide letter dated 23.12.1988 Faridabad Scrap Dealers Welfare Association (Regd.) submitted two sets of lists, one for 200 sq. yards aspirants and second for 100 sq. yards.
Accordingly, the Corporation issued allotment letters on 30.12.1988 but the said proposal could not be finalized by the State Government and the allotment letters were cancelled on 15.11.1990. It is alleged that a fresh survey was conducted by the Faridabad Complex Administration and found that out of total number of 172 allotted plots, 27 allottees did not exist at the site, in 45 cases, firm was found registered in the name of partners and 2-3 partners were working against one registration in the same premises and CWP No.13030 of 1999 and other connected cases -5- legally only one plot could be allotted to the firm but in 45 cases partners were allotted plots individually.
In most of the writ petitions in this batch, the stand taken by the respondents is regarding either of non-existence of allottee at the spot from where he is supposed to be displaced due to shifting of the market or the allotment is found to have been made to all the partners though it could have been allotted only to the firm.
Insofar as, the issue as to whether the petitioners really exist at the spot as scrap dealers is a pure question of fact which cannot be determined in the writ jurisdiction. Similarly, whether the allotment is to be made to one firm or to be made to all the partners who are otherwise entitled or not is again a question of fact because the land in occupation of the petitioners do not belong either to the individual or to the firm as it belongs to the Government and they are admittedly in unauthorized possession.
In view thereof, we refrain to make any observation on the merits in the writ petitions and relegate the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law but insofar as the writ petitions are concerned, they are not maintainable. Hence the same are hereby dismissed.
(A.K. SIKRI) (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE October 17, 2012 Vivek