Mr. Ranjit Singh, J.: - This order will dispose of writ petition Nos.19927, 19965 and 20127 of 2009, 1605, 1637, 1646, 1647, 1648, 1649, 1650, 1651, 1652, 2272, 2837, 2838, 2839, 3742, 6940, 7980, 8594, 16675 and 16703 of 2010.

2. Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter called HUDA) Act enacted in the year 1977 with the purpose of constituting a statutory authority in place of Department of Urban Estate with aim to ensure speedy and economic development of urban areas in the state of Haryana. One of the reasons for enacting this Act, as can be seen from the statement of Objects and Reasons, is that the Urban Estate Department being a Government Department was unable to raise resources from various lending institutions though there were such institutions in the country willing to finance urban land development. The aim was to make the development of urban areas to be self financing. Ever since that day, HUDA has undertaken the development of various urban areas with reasonable success. This has given rise to numerous other incidental problems. The urban areas development has primarily happened due to acquisition of agricultural land available in and around urban areas of the State. Majority of the acquisition of land is from farming community and agriculturist. They, accordingly, stood deprived of their valuable property though on a compensation which was never in tune with the value of land the farmers lost. All such persons faced numerous problems on account of acquisition. It may not be very appropriate to list all these problems here, but it is generally understood and appreciated that in majority of the acquisition, almost without exception, the grievances were made by the farmers for the amount of compensation awarded to them. Invariably this lead to enhancement of compensation but by the time enhanced compensation reached the farmers it become inadequate. The inflation has always over shot resources with land losers making the land losers almost unable to re-adjust themselves somewhere else.

3. The problem that arose on account of compulsory acquisition of land, which has lead to enrichment of the State authority like HUDA, was also subject matter of consideration by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. Versus Pista Devi, AIR 1986 SC 2025. Due to far reaching observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case, which have been referred to and relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner, various States formulated different policies to cater for the interest of those farmers, whose land was acquired and they became oustees from their own land. These are the policies, which are now under consideration in the bunch of these writ petitions.

4. Almost every day this Court or perhaps various other courts, are flooded with the claims of persons termed as oustees seeking either allotment of plots or challenging the orders/action of the respondent-HUDA in not considering their claim in terms of these policies, which HUDA itself has formulated. Seeing this tendency in large number of cases and the nature of defences that are normally projected by HUDA, it is thought appropriate to connect all these petitions together for hearing to pass a comprehensive order taking note of all the policies instructions so as to settle the issue with some reasonable certainty. I am conscious of the position that the attitude of HUDA, which it is or has been, will not result in settling the issue but still the exercise may be worth an effort. It would also be a source of some solace to those farmers, who are struggling to get some plot on the same very land, which they have lost for carving out a polished richy-rich Urban areas. The resistance on the part of the HUDA is understandable. It is a profit making business and HUDA obviously does not want to lessen its profits or to share part of it with those who are source of this enrichment. HUDA obviously would be keen to make rules to protect its interest v