Devi Ram Sharma Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Devi Ram Sharma vs State of Haryana and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Aug 13, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1055008

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1055008
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Aug 13, 2013
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Devi Ram Sharma

Respondent

State of Haryana and Others

Excerpt

.....further case of the petitioner that after the acquisition of the aforesaid land, his father died and he (the petitioner) stepped into the shoes of his father. the petitioner claims that in spite of the requests made by him, the respondents did not consider his claim for allotment of plot dass narotam 2013.08.13 14:03 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document cwp no.17494 of 2013 -2- under the oustee policy of the state government. in this regard, he submitted representation dated 24.6.2012 to the administrator, huda, gurgaon (respondent no.3 herein).copy of which is available on record as annexure p-11, but till date the same has not been considered and decided. after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, without issuing notice of motion as it will un-necessary delay the matter, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the estate officer, huda, gurgaon, to consider and decide the aforesaid representation dated 24.6.2012 in accordance with law by passing a speaking order, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months. ( satish kumar mittal ) judge august 13, 2013 ( mahavir s. chauhan ) ndj judge dass narotam 2013.08.13 14:03 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.17494 of 2013 DATE OF DECISION :

13. 08.2013 Devi Ram Sharma ...PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE MAHAVIR S.

CHAUHAN Present: Mr.R.S.Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner.

*** SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J.

( Oral ) The petitioner has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondents to allot him plot under the oustees category.

It is the case of the petitioner that 11/210 share in the land measuring 91 Kanals 13 Marlas, situated in village Salokhra, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, which was owned by his father Ganga Parshad, was acquired vide notification dated 17.4.1989, for development and utilisation of Residential and Commercial Sector 29 (Part) and Sector 25 (Part).Gurgaon.

It is the further case of the petitioner that after the acquisition of the aforesaid land, his father died and he (the petitioner) stepped into the shoes of his father.

The petitioner claims that in spite of the requests made by him, the respondents did not consider his claim for allotment of plot Dass Narotam 2013.08.13 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.17494 of 2013 -2- under the oustee policy of the State Government.

In this regard, he submitted representation dated 24.6.2012 to the Administrator, HUDA, Gurgaon (respondent No.3 herein).copy of which is available on record as Annexure P-11, but till date the same has not been considered and decided.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, without issuing notice of motion as it will un-necessary delay the matter, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the Estate Officer, HUDA, Gurgaon, to consider and decide the aforesaid representation dated 24.6.2012 in accordance with law by passing a speaking order, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE August 13, 2013 ( MAHAVIR S.

CHAUHAN ) ndj JUDGE Dass Narotam 2013.08.13 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2013 Same Parties Devi Ram Sharma vs State of Haryana and Others Same Subject Land Acquisition