Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.18 seconds)
Avtar Kaur And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 December, 2014 cites

Surjit Singh And Ors. vs State Of Punjab on 27 April, 1983

"9. ........By filing an application in accordance with law, the applicant only gets a right of consideration of his application, but he does not get a vested right for allotment of the plot. The conditions laid down in the first scheme or the provisions of rule 5(3) do not give any right to the VIMAL KUMAR 2014.12.18 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh 3 applicants to claim allotment of plots as a matter of right. There is nothing in the scheme or the Act or the Rules which requires the adop- tion of the principle of `first come first served' at the time of allotment, or debars the Government from adopting the method of drawing lots. The petitioners have not been able to lay foundation for establishing their right which could legally be enforced and the petitioners have completely failed to make out a case for the exercise of our extraordi- nary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India."
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 49 - Full Document

Man Mohan Singh vs Huda on 22 July, 2010

It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the price, applicable on the date of allotment, is chargeable from an allottee and not the price, which was once fixed at the time of floatation of sector. It is contended that price of the plots keep varying keeping in view the cost of acquisition, development work and other numerous factors which go into determination of the price. It is contended that the VIMAL KUMAR 2014.12.18 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh 4 judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Brij Mohan v. HUDA (2011) 2 SCC 29 is of no help to the oustees. In the said case, the appellant was not allotted plot when HUDA offered residential plots in Sector - 4, Karnal. The two questions arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In respect of first question i.e. whether HUDA should charge only the actual land cost plus development charges for the plots allotted to an oustee and not the market price/normal allotment price; the Court returned a finding that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 contemplates only benefits like solatium, additional amount and higher rate of interest to the oustees and not allotment of plots at cost price. HUDA or the State Government does not have any scheme providing for allotment of plots at actual cost of oustees. Therefore, it is not possible for the Court to direct the State Government or the Development Authority to allot plots to the oustees at a reasonable cost. It was held to the following effect:
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1