Punjab-Haryana High Court
Estate Officer , Ut Chandigarh vs Pardeep And Ors on 4 December, 2014
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
CWP No.24866 of 2014 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.24866 of 2014
Date of Decision.04.12.2014
Estate Officer, U.T., Chandigarh ......Petitioner
Versus
Pardeep and another ......Respondents
Present: Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Advocate with
Mr. Jaivir S. Chandail, Advocate
for the petitioner.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
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?
-.-
K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)
1. There is no interference called for to an order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat which has recognized the status of the applicant as living independently from his parents and allotment has been made on a proof of his possession. The Administration would have its objection to state that the private respondent who obtained allotment of the property is an unmarried person and he has no kitchen in his own house and he shares it with his parents.
2. I cannot find any merit in a plea that a single member cannot obtain an allotment. There is also no rule that any member of the family who had claimed the allotment as a person who is remaining unmarried though living separately will not be entitled to secure an allotment. It is only in a situation where though an unmarried person lives as a member of the family along with his parents or his siblings who PANKAJ KUMAR 2014.12.09 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.24866 of 2014 -2- could be disqualified for an independent allotment, if an allotment is made to the family as a unit. If any one of the members of the family claims separation and pleads for an allotment, then so long as there is no express prohibition under the rules, allotment claimed by such a separate person cannot be questioned.
3. I also find no merit in the argument that there is no kitchen in the portion which is claimed by the private respondent. Kitchen is a facility which a person may choose to have in his own house or not. I cannot take this to be a ground for rejecting his claim for allotment and make a presumption that he should only be living along with parents. I find no reason for making an interference to the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat.
4. The writ petition is dismissed.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE December 04, 2014 Pankaj* PANKAJ KUMAR 2014.12.09 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh