SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(P&H) 683

S.J.VAZIFDAR, ARUN PALLI
Manju S. Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. AG, Haryana.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Arun Palli J.:- A writ in the nature of certiorari is prayed for to quash an order dated 17.08.1992 (Annexure P4), rendered by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Gurgaon (respondent No.4), vide which the residential site allotted to the petitioner was resumed and orders dated 12.12.1996 (Annexure P6) and 18.08.1997 (Annexure P11), whereby the appeal as also the revision preferred by the petitioner against the order of resumption were dismissed.

2. A brief narration of facts that have led the parties to the current stage would be expedient.

3. Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), in the year 1984, invited applications for allotment of residential sites through draw of lots in Sector 22, Gurgaon. In terms of clause 11 of the brochure-cum-application form (Annexure P1), only those applicants were eligible to apply, who did not own a residential house/plot in Gurgaon Urban Estate in his/her name or in the name of any of their dependent family members. For, the petitioner as well as her husband were eligible to apply, they both sought allotment by moving two separate app































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top